U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Fiscal Year 2011 Final National Program & Grant Guidance May 7, 2010 ------- Contents Executive Summary 1 1. Program Office 1 2. Purpose and Organization of Document 1 3. Collaboration with Co-Regulators 1 4. National Priorities 2 5. Priorities for Regional Offices 2 6. Cross-agency Priorities 3 7. State and Tribal Assistance Grants 8 8. Implementation Strategies 8 9. Performance Measures 9 10.Tracking Progress 9 Healthier Outdoor Air 10 Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 11 Federal Stationary Source Regulations 16 Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certifications 17 Federal Support for Air Quality Management 19 State and Local Air Quality Management 30 Tribal Air Quality Management 40 Climate Protection 46 Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule 46 Proposed PSD and Title V GHG Tailoring Rule 48 Vehicle GHG Standards 48 Renewable Fuel Standard Program 49 Potential New Source Performance Standards 50 Clean Automotive Technology 50 Voluntary Climate Protection Programs 51 Stratospheric Ozone 54 Domestic Programs 55 Multilateral Fund 55 Indoor Environments 56 Asthma 57 Radon 57 Radiation Protection 60 Radiation Protection 60 Radiation Emergency Response Preparedness 62 Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 63 Appendix A Performance Measures (including State Grant Performance Measures) Appendix B Effective Utilization and Distribution of STAG Funds Appendix C Ambient Monitoring Appendix D Office of Air and Radiation 2010 Priorities Appendix E Key Changes from 2010 Appendix F Program Contacts (for questions or more information) Appendix G Draft Work Plan for Environmental Justice Appendix H Responses to Comments ------- Executive Summary 1. Program Office. Office of Air and Radiation (OAR). 2. Purpose and Organization of Document This document describes operational air and radiation program implementation priorities and milestones for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, and provides information and guidance on FY 2011 state, local, and tribal assistance grants. The guidance consists of this Executive Summary, five topical chapters covering OAR's main areas of concern (Healthier Outdoor Air, Climate Protection, Stratospheric Ozone, Indoor Environments, and Radiation Protection), and several appendices. Each topical chapter provides an overview of the program and the key programmatic activities expected to be undertaken in FY 2011 by headquarters, regions, states, local agencies, and tribes, as applicable. A substantial change for this guidance is that much of the information on state and tribal assistance grants is now integrated into the main body of the document rather than being in a separate appendix. Updates on new grant initiatives, areas of changing emphasis, and associated program support are discussed under the "State and Tribal Assistance Grants" section of the Executive Summary and in the Outdoor Air chapter under the "State and Local Air Quality Management" subheading. Separate appendices continue to be provided for: • Performance measures for EPA Regions and co-implementors (Appendix A) • Policies and procedures for effective grants management and a preliminary region-by- region national allocation (Appendix B) • More detailed information on changes in ambient monitoring (Appendix C) The final guidance reflects consideration of the numerous stakeholder comments received during the comment period. Appendix H summarizes OAR's responses to specific questions and comments, including those on funding, received from partners and stakeholders. 3. Collaboration with Co-Regulators. Protection of public health and the nation's air resources is a partnership among federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, and cannot be accomplished effectively without constructive, ongoing relationships and regular open communication. In February 2010, representatives of OAR and the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) met and discussed a range of priority issues and committed to focus on a number of areas of particular concern. These included adequacy of funding and the effective use of available resources, greenhouse gas program implementation, state air quality implementation plan reforms, and multi-pollutant and sector based approaches to air pollution control. Many of these discussions are still ongoing and the most recent developments may not be reflected in this guidance. Final Guidance May?, 2010 1 of 63 ------- 4. OAR National Priorities. In a January 2010 memorandum,1 Administrator Jackson identified seven key priorities to focus the work of the Agency. OAR Assistant Administrator (AA) Gina McCarthy subsequently distributed a document describing the specific ways that OAR would direct energy and resources, and the priority activities OAR would carry out, to support the Administrator's priorities.2 Specific actions related to these priorities are discussed in the topical chapters of this document. The priority areas of focus are: • Reduce GHGs • Complete and Implement Critical Regulatory Actions to Improve Outdoor Air Quality • Elevate the Importance of Indoor Air Quality • Work for Healthier Communities and Environmental Justice • Build Strong Partnerships with States, Tribes, and Local Agencies 5. Priorities for Regional Offices. OAR works with and through EPA's 10 Regional Offices, who in turn work with state, local, and tribal governments, communities, and others, to implement OAR's national priorities and programs. The Regional Offices also work with those entities, and others, to jointly plan and set priorities to address unique regional or local environmental priorities, issues, conditions, and concerns. OAR recognizes that regions have their own region-specific priorities and strategies, and strives to provide regions with the programmatic flexibility they need to address their priorities as well as the OAR national priorities. For FY 201 1, the OAR national priorities for regions are: Greenhouse Gases. Assist in implementing the GHG mandatory reporting rule, and work with states and local agencies to build their capacity to implement the proposed Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Tailoring Rule. Continue to promote and expand awareness and encourage participation in voluntary GHG reduction programs and activities. Ozone, Lead, PM^, and Regional Haze. Act on State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions and redesignation requests including regional haze control strategy plans, assist in designating areas for the revised lead standard and ozone standard, and begin working with states on developing attainment plans for areas designated nonattainment for ozone. Clean Air Interstate Rule. Assist states with CAIR emissions monitoring and reporting. Ambient Monitoring. Work with state and local agencies to implement the near-source lead monitoring network; develop NO2 monitoring plans; provide assistance for changes in 201 1 ozone monitoring season, if required; communicate any required changes to each state's ozone monitoring network for non-urban and lower population areas for inclusion in annual monitoring network plans; ensure certification of 2010 data submitted to AQS database by May 1, 201 1; and, ensure readiness of remaining required NCore monitoring, such as PMio-2.5 mass, due to start on January 1, 201 1. Also, work with HQ and state and 1 Full document available at http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/2010/01/12/seven-priorities-for-epas-future/ 2 Full document is included as Appendix D. Final Guidance May?, 2010 2 of 63 ------- local agencies to expand community-based air toxics monitoring, particularly in communities disproportionately impacted by air pollution. Mobile Sources. Implement the National Clean Diesel Campaign, assist with and comment on conformity determinations, process conformity-related SIP revisions, and make determinations and act on mobile budgets at time of SIP processing. Air Toxics. Delegate and provide assistance to co-regulators for section 111, section 112, and section 129 standards; increase emphasis on implementing programs and activities that contribute to reducing exposure to air toxics in areas that are experiencing disproportionate impacts. Support the OAR/Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) community air toxics initiative in selected pilot areas. Title V Permits. Work on overseeing state permitting activities, issuing PSD and Part 71 permits in Indian Country and on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), permitting the pollution sources that remain to be addressed, and completing permit renewals. Indoor Environments. Improve indoor air quality and increase the number of people breathing healthier indoor air by working with state, local, tribal, and other stakeholders to build community capacity to reduce asthma triggers, improve indoor air quality in schools, and reduce radon exposure. Radiation. Work with our national, international, state, tribal, and local government partners, industry, environmental groups and the public to review, update or revise our uranium regulations and older guidance. Continue to prepare for and respond to radiological emergencies. Continue work with the regions to provide technical assistance, outreach and education in the location of radioactive mine wastes that contaminate tribal lands and water resources with radionuclides and heavy metals. State, Local and Tribal Planning. Support multi-pollutant planning and efforts to reduce emissions of all air pollutants, while addressing other considerations such as land use, transportation, and energy. 6. Cross-Agency Priorities Cutting Air Pollution in Communities Environmental protection is community protection. OAR will pursue several initiatives that focus on reducing air pollution in vulnerable communities and will work with OECA and other EPA offices to address air pollution at the community scale. OAR's recent experience in monitoring air toxics levels and risks at schools, and work in several communities, make it evident that the public health and environmental impacts associated with air toxics emissions occur largely at the local level. Further, existing information suggests that such risks may disproportionately affect some vulnerable subpopulations, such as schoolchildren. Consistent with the Administrator's commitment to Congress to protect the public from toxic air pollution where they live, work, and play, OAR and OECA will work together and with states and communities to identify if and Final Guidance May?, 2010 3 of 63 ------- where air toxics pollution is occurring at unsafe levels, and will focus regulatory and non- regulatory activities to reduce air toxics pollution within at-risk communities, and around schools and other places where children and other sensitive populations may be exposed. Consistent with this focus, OECA has established two air-related enforcement priorities based on outreach to EPA programs and regions, states and tribal governments, environmental advocacy groups, environmental justice groups, and the public: cutting toxic air pollution in communities, and reducing air pollution from largest sources. For air toxics, OECA will: (1) focus on excess emissions caused by facilities' failure to comply with leak detection and repair requirements and restrictions on flaring, and (2) address excess emissions during start-up, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) events. For large sources, OECA will focus on illegal emissions from facilities lacking NSR/PSD permits. The benefits may be felt at a distance from the point of emission reduction, as a result of transported air pollution. Targeting analyses will be done to identify where emissions of criteria air pollutants are occurring and where communities may be disproportionately exposed to criteria pollutants. For FY 2011-2013, OECA is targeting four industrial sectors: coal-fired electric utilities, cement manufacturing facilities, sulfuric and nitric acid manufacturing facilities, and glass manufacturing facilities. OAR will be working on a number of large stationary source rules that will result in greatly reduced air emissions that affect vulnerable communities. In addition, EPA will undertake rulemaking to respond to the mandate issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in October 2009 vacating language in the General Provisions that govern the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) program. The ruling had impacts on whether sources are exempt from MACT compliance during periods of SSM. Emissions can be large during SSM events, and impacts on nearby communities can be significant. EPA is working to address the issue and reduce the risks posed by these emissions. Children's Environmental Health Children's environmental health should be an intrinsic part of decision-making at every level of the Agency. EPA must build on existing activities and accomplishments so that children's health protection is not just a consideration in Agency decision-making, but a driving force in our decisions. We must use a variety of approaches to protect children from environmental health hazards, including regulation, implementation of community- based programs, research, and outreach. At the same time, we must periodically evaluate our performance to ensure that we are making progress towards this goal. In all of our efforts, regions, states, and tribes should identify and assess environmental health risks that may disproportionately affect children throughout their life stages, including fetal development, infancy, childhood, and adolescence. Regional programs must ensure that policies, programs, activities, and standards address disproportionate risks to children. Within each region is a Children's Health Coordinator who serves as a resource to assist offices and divisions with children's environmental health programs and planning. The Regional Children's Health Coordinator is also a liaison between the Region and the Office of Children's Health Protection and Final Guidance May?, 2010 4 of 63 ------- Environmental Education at Headquarters. Actions regions can take in FY 2011 to expand efforts to protect children's environmental health include: • Reviewing existing ACS measures that are specific to or refer to children's health to determine if these can be modified or supplemented to better report outcomes and results in children's environmental health for inclusion in future planning and reporting agreements; • Formulating discussions and agenda topics on children's health outcomes for EPA programs in national meetings, such as division directors meetings; • Implementing the Agency's Children's Environmental Health Guidance for Human Health Risk Assessments (http://epa.gov/risk/guidance.htm); • Sponsoring joint meetings with counterparts in state and tribal environmental departments and health departments to facilitate coordinated actions to better protect children's environmental health; and, • Developing regional strategies to focus on addressing critical children's health issues unique to the region. Environmental Justice One of priorities identified in the Administrator's January 2010 memorandum3 is to expand the conversation on environmentalism and work for environmental justice. OAR has long been committed to addressing environmental justice issues, and in 1992 we developed our first Environmental Justice Action Plan. OAR's efforts have been consistent with the Agency's environmental justice policies, and are described in the OAR FY 2009 Environmental Justice Action Plan4 (currently being updated). OAR's environmental justice priorities are highlighted in Appendix D "Office of Air and Radiation 2010 Priorities," and specific environmental justice activities to be conducted are described in the Healthier Outdoor Air and Indoor Environments chapters of this guidance. As we implement our programs, we will connect with those who have been historically underrepresented in EPA decision-making, including communities of color, Native Americans, the poor, and people disproportionately impacted by pollution, and our programs and policies will reflect our consideration of the burdens that pollution has placed on vulnerable subpopulations. At the same time, we will strengthen our internal mechanisms to assure adequate funding for critical projects, including those that focus on incorporating environmental justice into our work, and accountability for improving air quality in areas that are disproportionately impacted by air pollution. In addition, OAR will work with the regions to help educate and raise awareness with states on opportunities to address environmental justice, and promote the use of an 3 Full document available at http://blog.epa.gov/administrator/2010/01/12/seven-priorities-for-epas-future/ 4 Full document available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/reports/actionplans/ei/ Final Guidance May?, 2010 5 of 63 ------- integrated problem solving strategy in the regional EJ Showcase Communities. This strategy engages all appropriate EPA programs as well as state, local, tribal and non- government partners. The strategy also coordinates the use of all appropriate tools to address the issues identified in the Showcase Communities, including meaningful community involvement, outreach and education, environmental research, risk assessment, monitoring and modeling, alternate dispute resolution, permitting and regulatory tools, as well as many voluntary efforts. The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) is the national program manager for EPA's Environmental Justice Program. OECA has recently published its goals and national enforcement initiatives for FY 2011-2013.5 For FY 2011, OAR and OECA will be working together to reduce toxic air pollution in communities that are disproportionately affected by pollution. In another recent development, the Office of Environmental Justice within OECA has drafted a framework to organize the Agency's environmental justice work and support the Administrator's environmental justice priority. The framework consists of a Draft Work Plan with four goals supported by a series of objectives. The complete Draft Work Plan, including goals and objectives, is included as Appendix G. Where specific environmental justice activities are described in the Healthier Outdoor Air and Indoor Environments chapters of this guidance, we have included a reference to indicate which of the draft goals the stated activity supports. Transboundary Programs Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) Program The goal of EPA's Great Lakes program is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, as required by the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and the Clean Water Act. Extensive work of the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and its wide variety of stakeholders and non-governmental partners culminated in the 2005 Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy (GLRC Strategy). In 2009, the President announced a new Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, committing the Federal government to significantly advance protection and restoration of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) program is a portion of this effort and is coordinated by the Great Lakes Commission to address the deposition of toxic pollutants and to promote coordinate efforts to reduce such deposition and the resulting adverse impacts on human and wildlife health. The program, which also supports the Great Lakes Bi-National Air Toxics Strategy with Canada, supports scientific research, information gathering and collaboration among policy makers. The GLAD program shares STAG resources among the eight Great Lakes States: Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. 5 Available at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/plaiuiing/initiatives/goals.html Final Guidance May?, 2010 6 of 63 ------- Funds are awarded under the CAA §105 and are provided to the states via their categorical air program grant or as an air work plan element in a performance partnership grant. All the GLAD funding is used to address the deposition of persistent bioaccumulative toxics (PBTs) in the waterways of the Great Lakes Region. This effort includes, but is not limited to, outputs such as PBT air monitoring, source characterization, source allocation, and source reduction efforts. In FY2010, the majority of funding was targeted for the development of a total maximum daily load standard (TMDL) for mercury to address waterways impaired by air sources. Certain states plan to address PBTs by targeting a specific source, such as open burning. In FY2011, it is expected that many states will continue to address mercury-impaired waters with implementation of their TMDLs as their desired outcome. For more information on the program, please contact Erin Newman in Region 5 (312-886-4587). US-Mexico Border Air Program Under the the 27-year old La Paz Agreement between the U.S. and Mexico, EPA and its Mexican counterpart, SEMARNAT, have established a bi-national program - Border 2012 - that focuses on cleaning the environment, protrecting the public health, and ensuring emergency preparedness for the 12 million people who live along the U.S.-Mexico border. The program supports the initiatives of the affected state, local and multi-jurisdictional agencies on both sides of the border and uses regional workgroups, task forces, and policy forums to develop and implement pollution reduction strategies. In encouraging local and grass-roots strategies, the Border 2012 Program empowers a larger number of state, local, tribal entities (also working with academics and NGOs) to become active participants in border air quality improvements. For example, OAR and SEMARNAT lead the Border 2012 Air Policy Forum, established to employ a collaborative, stakeholder-driven approach to develop strategies for cooperative and sustainable air emissions reduction efforts along the border. The Air Policy Forum has developed an integrated, border-wide air quality strategy, to guide emissions reduction projects taking place in the border region. This includes a new border-wide objective and reduction strategy for GHGs that lays the path for baseline development, climate action planning, energy efficiency, and other related border projects. Air Policy Forum members additionally advise EPA and Mexico's SEMARNAT on potential strategic funding needs and opportunities. EPA activities fall into three primary areas: (1) public outreach and education using Border 2012 task forces and work groups with a growing focus on GHGs; (2) the enhancement of scientific knowledge including emissions inventories with a focus on GHGs and air quality monitoring; and (3) the support of mobile source, stationary source and/or GHG projects that deliver tangible emission reductions and that may also promote border energy conservation, sustainability, or renewable energy efforts. For more information on the Border 2012 Program please contact: Ruben Casso in Region 6 (214- 665-6763); and in Region 9, Christine Vineyard (415-947-4125) or Andrew Steckel (415- 947-4115). Final Guidance May?, 2010 7 of 63 ------- Use of the National Environmental Information Exchange Network In a July 2009 memorandum, Administrator Jackson made enhanced use of the National Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for the Agency. She wrote in response to a unanimous request from the Environmental Council of the States that she intended "the Agency to work with the states to set an aggressive timetable for completing the transition to the Exchange Network (EN) for regulatory and national system reporting...." She directed the National Program Managers (NPMs) to work to achieve the vision of the Network as "the preferred way EPA, states, tribes, and others share and exchange data." She added "I look forward to reviewing our progress toward achieving this goal...." In response to this direction from the Administrator, OAR places a high priority on increasing the use the EN for the transmission of air quality measurement data from states, tribes, and localities to EPA. Specific actions are discussed in the Healthier Outdoor Air chapter under the State and Local Air Quality Management subheading. 7. State and Tribal Assistance Grants State, local, tribal, and multi-jurisdictional agencies are essential in the development and implementation of programs for preventing and controlling air pollution and for implementing the NAAQS to protect the public health and environment. Congress appropriates grant assistance and associated program support for these co- implementors under the Agency's State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) appropriation. Eligible entities are defined by statute, budget request, and appropriation. Funds for continuing air programs are awarded to state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies using Section 105 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and require a recipient cost share. Section 103 provides 100% federal funding to eligible entities to conduct studies, investigations, experiments, surveys, demonstrations, training, and certain forms of research, on the nature, prevention, causes, and effects of air pollution. Section 106, which also require a recipient match, provides EPA with the authority to fund interstate air pollution control agencies and including interstate transport commissions, to develop or carry out plans for designated air quality control regions. Beyond the Clean Air Act, significant funds are also provided under Sections 791-797 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act for the support of programs to reduce diesel emissions. For FY 2011, the Agency's budget request includes a significant increase in STAG funds to assist states and local agencies with new as well as expanded core program responsibilities under the Act. These include: the development and implementation of plans to address revised, more protective NAAQS; ambient air monitoring provisions related to the new NAAQS; enhanced capacity for agencies with approved or delegated responsibility for permitting large sources of GHGs; and the continued characterization of air toxics problems and implementation of measures to reduce their risks. While a modest increase has also been included for Tribal air programs the Agency budget request also includes significant increases in other Tribal grant programs under which air activity is eligible. 8. Implementation Strategies. EPA's array of tools to facilitate the implementation of the Clean Air Act includes statutory and regulatory activities, market-based program activities, Final Guidance May?, 2010 8 of 63 ------- partnership and community-based activities, and activities related to developing or implementing innovative approaches. EPA works with co-implementors to assemble the mix of strategies and activities most appropriate for their circumstances and prevailing environmental issues while also addressing base program requirements. These strategies are described in the technical sections of this document. EPA regions also work closely with states to identify opportunities for enhanced work sharing, resource flexibility, and phased implementation of program requirements. For example, Performance Partnership Grants (PPGs) and Performance Partnership Agreements (PPAs) are two examples of the tools available to address workload issues. 9. Performance Measures. OAR and the Regions have collaborated to develop and agree on the performance measures listed in Appendix B. These were determined through discussions among HQ and regional program experts and managers. The Agency's 2010-2015 Strategic Plan is expected to be final on September 30, 2010. As we proceed with implementing the Strategic Plan for FY 2011 it may be necessary to make adjustments to annual measures and commitments specified in this Guidance to align with the new Strategic Plan. Additional guidance will be provided as needed. 10. Tracking Progress. OAR tracks progress through existing monitoring, data reporting, and information systems used by OAR, regions, and state, tribal, and local agencies, and through EPA's performance measure database. We also track and discuss program progress via conference calls, face-to-face meetings, and the exchange of written information. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 9 of 63 ------- Healthier Outdoor Air EPA's strategy for achieving healthier outdoor air combines national, regional, and local measures, reflecting different federal, state, tribal, and local government roles. States are primarily responsible for maintaining and improving air quality and meeting national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) established by EPA. State programs develop emission inventories; operate and maintain air monitoring networks; implement construction and operating permit programs for major and minor sources of criteria pollutants, toxics, and other regulated air pollutants; perform air quality modeling; develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that lay out control strategies for improving air quality and meeting NAAQS, and engage in public education activities. EPA assists states by providing technical guidance and financial assistance, issuing regulations, and implementing programs designed to reduce pollution from the most widespread and significant sources of air pollution: mobile sources, such as cars, trucks, buses, and construction equipment; and stationary sources, such as power plants, oil refineries, chemical plants, and dry cleaning operations. Interstate transport of pollutants—a problem no state can solve on its own—makes a major contribution to air pollution problems. To address this issue, EPA requires control of upwind sources that contribute to downwind problems in other states. EPA has a trust responsibility to protect air quality in Indian country, but tribes may choose to develop and implement their own air quality programs. In collaboration with EPA, tribes and some states are working to fill the gap in air quality data/information on tribal lands, build tribal capacity to administer air programs in Indian country, and establish mechanisms to work with tribal governments on regulatory development and regional and national policy issues. Our strategies for achieving healthier outdoor air are implemented through the following programs: • Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs • Federal Vehicle and Fuels Standards and Certifications • Federal Stationary Source Regulations • Federal Support for Air Quality Management (including air toxics) • State and Local Air Quality Management • Tribal Air Quality Management The first four programs are federally-implemented programs and the latter two are grant programs that support state, tribal, and local air program implementation. All these programs and their 2011 Priorities are described below. Although this document is organized to reflect EPA's internal organization, there is substantial coordination between and among EPA HQ and Regional offices. Where topics are repeated in this document, it is an indication of a cross-office activity. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 10 of 63 ------- CLEAN AIR ALLOWANCE TRADING PROGRAMS This program includes development, implementation, and evaluation of federally- administered emission reduction programs that include the trading of emissions allowances. Trading programs help implement the NAAQS and reduce acid deposition, toxics deposition, and regional haze. Pollutants include SO2, NOx, and, as a co-benefit of SO2 emission reduction programs, mercury. Current operating programs include the Acid Rain Program authorized under Title IV of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments, and the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) seasonal and annual programs for interstate control of ozone and fine particle (PM25) pollution. Our overall strategy to promote more flexible and cost-effective pollution control and achievement of environmental objectives includes the use of: rules with associated allowance trading programs, an integrated utility strategy, program accountability, and program support to co-implementors. Rules and Allowance Trading Programs • Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR): Continue implementation of this rule, consistent with the decision by the D.C. Circuit Court in December 2008 to "allow CAIR to remain in effect until it is replaced by a rule consistent with [the Court's July 11, 2008] opinion" so as to "at least temporarily preserve the environmental values covered by CAIR."6 CAIR enables states to use the proven cap-and-trade approach to achieve substantial reductions in SO2 and NOx emissions. CAIR is a powerful component of EPA's plan to help over 450 counties in the eastern U.S. meet and maintain health-based, protective air quality standards for ozone or PM2.5 by reducing transported pollution that drifts into a state from sources in upwind states. All affected states are achieving the mandated reductions primarily by controlling power plant emissions through an EPA-administered interstate cap-and-trade program. • Existing Programs: Implement, operate, and assess existing allowance trading programs, including the programs established under CAIR. • Transport Rule (CAIR Replacement): Propose the Transport Rule. EPA expects to propose the Transport Rule in the Spring of 2010 and to finalize the rule in the Spring of 2011. Integrated Utility Strategy In the next few years, EPA, as a result of statutory requirements and court decisions, will be promulgating a number of regulations that will affect the electric power industry: a Transport Rule to replace CAIR, a rule to reduce air toxics from utilities, and New Source Performance Standards for particulate matter, SO2, and NOx. The power sector is a sizeable emitter of all of these pollutants. Preliminary analyses show that the public health benefits of ; U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, No. 05-1244, page 3 (decided December 23, 2008). Final Guidance May?, 2010 11 of 63 ------- these rulemakings will likely be enormous. EPA will also be issuing new rules to protect water quality, fish, and other aquatic wildlife. There will also be a need to integrate all of these rules with any climate regulatory strategy since the power sector will be an important element to any future climate strategy. The most cost-effective way to implement these programs is through a coordinated set of actions for this industry. EPA's integrated approach will assure that, to the extent allowed by statute, the various policies and regulations work together in a coherent manner. It will allow companies to take advantage of co-control opportunities and efficiencies in developing compliance strategies while promoting energy security and a cleaner economy for the future. Program Accountability EPA will maintain an integrated assessment program that includes enhanced ambient and deposition monitoring, surface water monitoring and chemistry analysis, efficiency measures, and indicators to track health and environmental benefits, as called for in state of science reports by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)7 and the Heinz Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment.8 The Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) is a long-term atmospheric deposition monitoring network established in 1987 that serves as the nation's primary source for atmospheric data on the dry deposition component of acid deposition, rural ground-level ozone, and other forms of particulate and gaseous air pollution. Surface water chemistry is a direct indicator of the effects of acid deposition and enables assessment of how water bodies and aquatic ecosystems are responding to reductions in sulfur and nitrogen emissions. The Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME) program, and the Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) program, are designed to assess ecological response to acid deposition and the effectiveness of implementation of the 1990 CAA Amendments in reducing the acidity of surface waters in sensitive areas. EPA tracks and assesses program progress each year, and publishes an annual report on program compliance and environmental results (see US EPA, The NOx Budget Trading Program: 2008 Highlights, EPA-430-R-09-026, October 2009 and also http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progress/nbp08.html). EPA produced the 2008 annual progress report as a four-part series of timely web-based publications: (1) Emission, Compliance, and Market Data (May 2009); (2) Emission, Compliance, and Market Analysis (July 2009); (3) Environmental Results (October 2009); and (4) Highlights (October 2009). The third report segment contains measures, trends, and interpretive analyses of environmental outcomes such as improvements in ground-level ozone, reductions in total ambient nitrate concentrations, and decrease in areas with significant damage to ozone- sensitive tree species based on CASTNET, TIME/LTM, and other monitoring network data. 7 National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies, Air Quality Management in the United States (The National Academies Press: 2004). The report recommends that EPA's implementation of air quality regulations should place "more emphasis on results than process and should be designed to protect ecosystems as well as people." (http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php7record id=10728) 8 The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment. Indicators of Ecological Effects of Air Quality. (Washington, DC: 2009). Final Guidance May 7,2010 12 of 63 ------- Program Support to Co-Implementors States that participate in the NOx Budget Trading Program under the NOx SIP Call, and additional non-NOx Budget Program (NBP) states, will be transitioning into the CAIR seasonal NOx program and will need to continue to contribute STAG resources to support this effort. EPA provides support in the form of EPA FTE and contract resources in order to operate the centralized allowance trading and emissions tracking systems that are utilized by the participating states. Jurisdictions not affected or not participating in the trading programs do not contribute their grant resources to support them. In 2008, there were 2,568 affected units in the NBP: 2,249 electricity generating units (EGUs) and 319 industrial units. Through a wide range of pollution control strategies and an active seasonal NOx allowance trading market, emissions by the affected sources have continued to decrease. Emissions during the 2008 ozone season were 8% below the 2008 emissions cap; 62% lower than in 2000 (before implementation of the NBP), and 76% lower than in 1990 (before implementation of the 1990 CAA Amendments). The NBP trading program ended with the 2008 season: on January 1, 2009, EPA transferred 275,367 banked (unused) NBP allowance into CAIR seasonal NOx allowance accounts. The volume of emissions data EPA is processing under the CAIR seasonal program is 29% higher than the NBP, and the NBP emissions data almost tripled in volume from 2003 through 2008. EPA has continued to invest in several software development activities that contain or lower program operating costs and, as a result, the processing costs per source are lower than they would have been otherwise. Most notably, EPA completed a multi-year software re- engineering project and deployed the Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS) tool in FY 2009. ECPMS provides users with a single client tool for checking and submitting data, direct access to EPA's database, and the ability to quality assure emissions data prior to submission in FY 2010 and beyond. EPA administers the allowance trading program; quality assures and processes reported emissions data, monitor certifications, and unit operating data; performs end-of-season reconciliation of emissions with allowances, and performs other administrative and assessment functions on behalf of the states through a national contract and associated program support. Support for operating the CAIR seasonal NOx trading program comes from grant funds of participating states in addition to EPA FTE and contract resources. As shown Table 1, state shares for FY 2011 are based on the number of affected sources per state times a unit cost per source (unit cost per source is down by over 40% from the early years of the NOx Budget Program). EPA will reconsider the approach and funding allocation when transitioning to the 2012 budget year. For more information contact Larry Kertcher at 202-343-9121 or Doris Price at 202-343- 9067 in the Clean Air Markets Division of GAP. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 13 of 63 ------- Table 1 - Contribution to CAIR Seasonal NOX Trading Program by Region and State Region/ State Region 1 Connecticut Massachusetts Region 2 New Jersey New York Region 3 Delaware Distrbt of Columbia Ma ryla nd Pennsylvania Virginia West Virgin! a Region 4 Alabama Florida Kentucky Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Region 5 Illinois Indiana Michigan Ohio Wisconsin Region 6 Arkansas Louisana Region 7 Iowa Missouri Total Annual$ Units Affected by CAIR Seasonal P rogram (FY 2007) 152 62 90 541 178 363 523 40 5 50 211 137 80 1,001 126 299 109 103 159 100 105 924 280 187 158 193 106 156 49 107 189 68 121 3,486 CAIR Seasonal Program Cost* FY 2008 - 201 1 $101,080 $41,230 $59,850 $359,765 $1 1 8,370 $241,395 $347,795 $26,600 $3,325 $33,250 $140,315 $91,105 $53,200 $665,665 $83,790 $198,835 $72,485 $68,495 $105,735 $66,500 $69,825 $609,856 $181,596 $124,355 $105,070 $128,345 $70,490 $103,740 $32,585 $71,155 $125,685 $45,220 $80,465 $2,318,190 * Processing cost per source calculated as $665 by OAP/CAMD. In FY 2011, EPA will continue to assist states with CAIR implementation, especially with activities related to allowance trading, emissions monitoring, and end-of-season reconciliation of emissions and allowances. The initial compliance season for the CAIR-Ozone NOx control program was May 1 - September 30, 2009, whereas the initial compliance year for the CAIR- PM SC>2 control program began on January 1, 2010, and continues through the end of the first quarter of FY2011 (December 31, 2010). Final Guidance May 7, 2010 14 of 63 ------- FY 2011 Priorities: CAIR-Ozone (Seasonal NOx) Program • HQ (CAMD), regions and states assist sources with monitor certifications, emissions monitoring and reporting. • HQ (CAMD) works with states to ensure proper allocations of allowances to source accounts. • HQ (CAMD) assists sources and other allowance account holders with allowance transfers and recordation. • HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-season reconciliation of emissions against allowances held in source accounts, determines program compliance, and deducts penalty allowances for any source not in compliance. • HQ (CAMD) and states perform electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and emissions reporting by sources. • HQ (CAMD) assesses program, tracks performance against baselines and objectives, and reports on emissions, compliance, market analyses, program performance, and environmental results. • HQ (CAMD) responds to comments by states, sources, and other program stakeholders on Transport Rule and finalizes rule (target Spring 2011). Working with regions and states, HQ (CAMD) plans transition from CAIR implementation to Transport Rule implementation. FY 2011 Priorities: CAIR-PM^s (SOi and Annual NOx Control ) Program • HQ (CAMD) assists states and sources with the final quarter and closeout of the initial compliance year for CAIR 862 control program, especially with emissions monitoring and reporting and allowance market operations. • HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-year reconciliation of SC>2 and NOx emissions in 2010 against allowances held in source accounts for the 862 and annual NOx control programs, determines program compliance, and deducts penalty allowances for any source not in compliance. • HQ (CAMD) and states perform electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and emissions reporting by sources. • HQ (CAMD) assesses program, tracks performance against baselines and objectives, and reports on emissions, compliance, market analyses, program performance, and environmental results. • HQ (CAMD) responds to comments by states, sources, and other program stakeholders on proposed Clean Air Transport Rule; finalizes rule (target Spring 2011). Working with regions and states, HQ (CAMD) plans transition from CAIR implementation to Transport Rule implementation. FY 2011 Priorities: Acid Rain Program • HQ (CAMD) performs end-of-year reconciliation of SO2 emissions against allowances held in facility accounts, determines compliance for annual NOx emission rates, and performs electronic and field audits of monitor certifications and emissions reporting by sources. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 15 of 63 ------- Working with states, tribes, local agencies, Regional Planning Organizations, and other partners in CASTNET, HQ (CAMD) develops and continues implementation of an operations plan that will assure supportability over the next five years. HQ (CAMD) completes transition of TIME/LTM surface water survey/network from ORD to OAR. Both programs are operated cooperatively with partners in state agencies, academic institutions, and other Federal agencies. HQ (CAMD) will award/manage assistance agreements with partners. HQ (CAMD) reports progress in reducing sulfur and nitrogen deposition and in reducing the number of chronically-acidic water bodies in acid-sensitive regions, and SO2 emissions reduced. FEDERAL STATIONARY SOURCE REGULATIONS This program includes HQ activities related to: Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT), combustion, and area source standard development; the stationary source Residual Risk program; New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); and associated national guidance and outreach information. The strategy is to develop regulations for sectors of stationary sources that reduce multiple pollutants in the most efficient and cost-effective manner, while simultaneously meeting multiple statutory obligations (MACT, Residual Risk, NSPS, etc.) and addressing environmental justice and other concerns. On October 16, 2009, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mandate vacating language in the General Provisions governing the MACT program to control emissions of air toxics. That language exempted sources from having to comply with the MACT standards during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM). This vacatur immediately affected about 35 of EPA's MACT standards that had referred to the General Provision rule for the exemption. An additional 64 of EPA's MACT standards contain SSM exemptions within the rules themselves and do not rely on the General Provisions exemptions. EPA plans to review these other MACT standards and determine whether to remove the exemptions for periods of malfunction and to clean up numerous other SSM-related provisions that were created to deal with the exemptions, such as recordkeeping, reporting, testing, etc., within these standards. EPA will also determine how to address startup and shutdown provisions within these 64 rules. We expect that if we eliminate the malfunction exemptions from these rules, the environmental benefits to communities located near facilities impacted by these rules will be significant. The Agency intends to address the malfunctions issue in an integrated rulemaking, which will provide assurance that facilities do not have incentives to routinely operate in a manner that allows excess or uncontrolled emissions. FY 2011 HO Priorities • Propose and promulgate area source standards and residual risk standards according to court ordered schedules. • Promulgate National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Brick and Structural Clay. • Promulgate NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers. Final Guidance May 7,2010 16 of 63 ------- • Promulgate NESHAP: Defense Land Systems and Miscellaneous Equipment (Military MACT). • Propose and promulgate additional amendments to prior NESHAP/MACT Standards. • Promulgate NESHAP for Industrial Boilers (major and area sources). • Promulgate Remand Response and Amendments for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (CISWI). • Promulgate Reconsideration of Stationary Combustion Turbines (Subpart KKKK). • Promulgate NESHAP for Gold Mining Production Processes. • Promulgate Response to Remand for Large Municipal Waste Combustion Units (MWCs). • Promulgate Response to Remand for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units (MWCs). • Propose MACT for Utilities • Propose NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride & Copolymers • Promulgate NSPS for Portland Cement • Develop revisions to NSPS for residential wood heaters • NSPS Review Strategy - Proposal • NSPS for Stationary Combustion Turbines (Reconsideration) - Final • NSPS Compression Ignition Engines; Amendments - Final • NSPS for Nitric Acid - Final • Reconsideration of NSPS Electric, Utility, Industrial Steam Generating Units (Da, Db, DC) - Proposal and Final • Assess the potential development of GHG performance standards for new stationary sources and guidelines for state regulation of existing sources, of certain sizes and within certain industrial categories. • Engage communities in rulemakings by expanding outreach and capacity building, improving accessibility of decision makers, and improving transparency. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 1 (see Appendix G), and the OAR/OECA air toxics initiative.) FEDERAL VEHICLE AND FUELS STANDARDS AND CERTIFICATION This program includes federal activities that support the development, implementation, and evaluation of regulatory, market-based, and voluntary programs to reduce pollutant emissions from mobile sources and fuels. Types of mobile sources addressed include: light-duty vehicles and engines (cars, light-duty trucks, sport utility vehicles); heavy-duty engines (buses, large trucks); nonroad vehicles/engines (construction, farm equipment, locomotives, marine); and fuels (diesel, gasoline, renewable). The strategy for reducing emissions from mobile sources has four elements. • Clean Vehicles: Develop, implement and ensure compliance with stringent emission standards for cars, light-duty trucks, sport utility vehicles, buses, large trucks, and nonroad vehicles/engines. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 17 of 63 ------- • Clean Fuels: Implement the renewable fuels program and cleaner gasoline and diesel fuel regulations and develop reformulated gasoline, diesel fuel, and non-petroleum alternatives. • Clean Transportation Alternatives: Develop strategies to encourage transportation alternatives that minimize emissions and address continued growth in vehicle miles travelled. • Clean Technology: Work with industry to certify low emission vehicles that use new engine technologies, such as clean diesel, exhaust gas recirculation for diesel, new catalyst technology, fuel cells, and hybrid-electric vehicles. Continue in-house assessment and development of clean engine and fuel technologies and conduct technology reviews to evaluate progress toward implementation of new vehicle and engine standards. Efforts related to greenhouse gases are discussed in the Climate Protection chapter. FY2011 Priorities Headquarters • Develop program to further reduce criteria pollutant emissions from light-duty vehicles, including program for cleaner fuel. • Participate in international forums for ocean-going vessels and aircraft to coordinate and advance emission controls from these sources. • Begin development of proposal to control lead in aviation gasoline. • Continue to develop and implement the Verify information management system that centralizes emission-related and fuel economy data for all mobile source industries. • Model fuel pathways not yet modeled and continue to develop and update lifecycle models to allow assessment of new biofuel technologies and to evaluate feedstocks and fuel pathways for future fuels and processes. • Continue testing activities for fuel economy, Tier II testing, reformulated gasoline, future fleets, alternative fuel vehicle conversion certifications, onboard diagnostics (OBD) evaluations, certification audits, and recall programs. • Review and approve approximately 5,000 vehicle and engine emissions certification requests, including light-duty vehicles, heavy-duty diesel engines, nonroad engines, marine engines, locomotives, and others. • Ensure compliance with certification as well as in-use requirements for foreign-built engines and equipment. • Develop a rule establishing OBD requirements for nonroad engines. • Continue to support implementation of existing vehicle, engine, and fuel regulations including the Tier II light-duty (LD) vehicle program, the Mobile Sources Air Toxics (MS AT) programs, the 2007-2010 Heavy-Duty (HD) Diesel standards, and the Non- Road Diesel Tier 4 standards (and earlier non-road standards) in order to ensure the successful delivery of cleaner vehicles, equipment, and fuel. • Continue to evaluate and develop the new fuel economy labelling program and ongoing assessment and analysis of emissions and fuel economy compliance data. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 18 of 63 ------- • Conduct follow-up implementation work related to the mobile source air toxics rulemaking in preparation for the 2011 program start date (work includes the assessment of refineries' pre-compliance reports and early credit generation, in order to monitor the viability of the benzene credit market). • Continue implementation activities for the Locomotives/Marine rule finalized in 2008 and for small gasoline engine standards that began with model year 2009. • Continue expansion and improvement of OTAQ' s transportation emission model, MOVES, by incorporating new emission data collected under EPAct/EISA. • Work with regions to assist states in developing, implementing, and transitioning I/M, OBD, and fuel programs. • As necessary, assist regions in processing conformity determinations made by metropolitan planning organizations or state agencies. • As necessary, assist regions in making adequacy determinations for identified mobile source budgets in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans submitted by states. • Work with OAQPS on implementation and other guidance related to revisions of NAAQS, especially with respect to I/M, Stage 2 and conformity. Regions • Assist states in preparing SIPs and developing, implementing, and transitioning mobile source control strategies such as I/M, OBD, and state fuel programs. • Assist states and local air quality and transportation agencies in future conformity determinations as needed. • Review and comment on transportation conformity determinations made by metropolitan planning organizations or state agencies. • Complete processing of transportation conformity SIPs submitted by states in FY 2011 as necessary. • Make adequacy/inadequacy determinations, as necessary, for identified mobile source budgets included in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans submitted by states and/or approve/disapprove such budgets at the time of SIP processing. • Work with OTAQ to provide training in the use of the MOVES model, and review modeling results for state and local agencies. • Work with states to develop creditable mobile source programs. • Work with HQ on Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for the Diesel Emissions Reduction Program which may include requests for projects that include working with financial experts to implement innovative financing programs to deliver lower cost financing to diesel truck and nonroad equipment buyers, many of whom are low-income and minority-owner operations and businesses operating in environmental justice areas. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT The federal support program includes Headquarters (HQ) and Regional Office non-financial support to state, tribal, and local air pollution control agencies for the following programs: NAAQS, regional haze, Title V, New Source Review (NSR), and Air Toxics. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 19 of 63 ------- The NAAQS program includes: regular reviews of, revisions to, and establishing standards for the criteria pollutants; developing associated national regulations, guidance and outreach information for implementing these standards; and developing emission limiting regulations for specific categories of sources. The federal support program also includes working with other federal agencies to ensure a coordinated approach, and with international governments to address sources of air pollutants that lie outside our borders but contribute to air quality degradation within the United States. Federal financial support is addressed under "State and Local Air Quality Management" and "Tribal Air Quality Management." The regional haze program includes developing national rules and guidance for protecting visibility in national parks and wilderness areas. NSR is a CAA program that requires industrial facilities to install modern pollution control equipment when they are built or when making a change that increases emissions significantly. The program accomplishes this when owners or operators obtain permits limiting air emissions before they begin construction. EPA issues permits on tribal lands, establishes permit program rules, reviews state programs, and provides guidance on permitting decisions. Large sources ("major" sources) of emissions and a limited number of smaller sources (called "area" sources, "minor" sources, or "non-major" sources) are required by Title V of the CAA to obtain an operating permit. Permits include pollution-control requirements from federal or state regulations that apply to the source. Most of the permits are issued by state or local agencies ("part 70" permits); a small number are issued by EPA ("part 71" permits). EPA also establishes rules, reviews state programs, and reviews citizen petitions. The air toxics program includes non-financial support to state, tribal, and local air pollution control agencies for: modeling, inventories, monitoring, assessments, strategy and program development; community-based toxics programs; voluntary programs including those that reduce inhalation risk and those that reduce deposition to water bodies and ecosystems; voluntary efforts to address diesel emissions; international cooperation to reduce transboundary and intercontinental air toxic pollution; National Emissions Inventory (NEI) development and updates; Persistent Bioaccumulative Toxics (PBT) activities; and training for air pollution professionals. In addition, the air toxics program includes activities for implementation of MACT, Residual Risk, and Area Source standards and the National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) and the National Air Pollutant Assessment (NAPA). NAAQS Program Strategy Over the next several years, we will continue to focus on required reviews of the NAAQS and on implementing the current PM and ozone NAAQS, including the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 revised 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (through anti-backsliding requirements) and the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In FY 2010, EPA finalized rulemaking for the NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and plans to finalize rulemaking for ozone in August 2010. EPA plans to place greater emphasis on integrating across OAR programs, specifically as it relates to energy issues and air quality planning. EPA will provide opportunities for greater collaboration with states, tribes and other federal agencies in addressing these air quality problems and continued emphasis on innovative strategies to improve air quality. EPA will provide technical assistance to states on emission reduction measures for PM2.5 and ozone Final Guidance May?, 2010 20 of 63 ------- nonattainment areas through issuing guidance documents and training of air pollution professionals. We will also be focusing on implementing the lead NAAQS, which is of particular importance to areas with potential environmental justice concerns. As previously discussed under the Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs subheading, EPA will undertake rulemaking to address the DC Circuit Court's concerns with CAIR. During the rulemaking process, EPA will continue to implement the current CAIR. Through the implementation process, EPA will ensure that current CAIR is integrated with other NAAQS programs and the regional haze program and will determine the degree those programs may still rely on the emissions reductions from the current CAIR. In the next few years, EPA, as a result of statutory requirements and court decisions, will be promulgating a number of regulations that will affect the electric power industry: a Transport Rule to replace CAIR; a rule to reduce air toxics from utilities, and New Source Performance Standards for particulate matter, SO2, and NOX. The power sector is a sizeable emitter of all of these pollutants. Preliminary analyses show that the public health benefits of these rulemakings will likely be enormous. EPA will also be issuing new rules for the power sector to protect water quality, fish, and other aquatic wildlife. There will also be a need to integrate all of these rules with any climate regulatory strategy since the power sector will be an important element to any future climate strategy. The most cost-effective way to implement these programs is through a coordinated set of actions for this industry. EPA's integrated approach will assure that, to the extent allowed by statute, the various policies and regulations work together in a coherent manner. It will allow companies to take advantage of co-control opportunities and efficiencies in developing compliance strategies while promoting energy security and a cleaner economy for the future. We will continue to work with states, tribes, and local air quality and transportation agencies to implement transportation conformity regulations and to ensure the technical integrity of mobile source controls in SIPs. We will also assist states, tribes, and local governments in crafting strategies that accommodate growth and economic development while minimizing adverse effects on air quality and other quality-of-life factors. This may include strategies to integrate air quality management into land use, transportation, energy use, and community development plans. We will also continue to work with states, tribes, and local agencies to implement an integrated ambient monitoring strategy which maximizes resource efficiency by deploying coordinated monitoring networks (i.e. combining platforms where feasible) toward current data collection needs for ozone, PM, 862, NCh, lead, regional haze, and air toxics We will continue to redesign our current emissions factor program for both criteria and air toxics pollutants to: (1) make the development of emissions factors more self-supporting and open to fuller participation by external organizations; (2) increase the use of electronic means to standardize the development process, quantify the quality components, and streamline all aspects of emissions factors development and use; (3) make the emissions factors uncertainties and emissions quantification methodologies more transparent to users; and (4) provide direction on the proper application of emissions factors consistent with non-inventory program goals including clearer guidance and direction on use of more direct quantification tools (e.g., Final Guidance May?, 2010 21 of 63 ------- emissions monitoring) in lieu of emissions factors; and (5) consider environmental justice in prioritizing the development of factors. NAAOS - FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Provide annual air quality reports to regions by June 1, 2010 and work with regions to develop appropriate actions to bring new violating attainment areas into compliance with theNAAQS. • Work with the regions on a consistent approach for making final clean air determinations for 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 nonattainment areas and 1997 moderate 8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas that attained by their attainment date based on the Clean Data Policy, and for taking action to approve attainment date extensions and making findings of failure to attain as necessary. • Continue to encourage and implement programs that result in cleaner burning appliances, provide information to the public on how to burn biomass more cleanly, and identify tools and resources for innovative financing approaches. • Continue to coordinate and provide technical and policy guidance to the regions on the PM2.5 implementation programs for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. • Work with federal, state, and tribal partners to address fire emissions impact on attainment of the NAAQS and the regional haze progress goals. • Provide technical and policy guidance to regions on implementing the lead, NO2, and SO2 NAAQS. • Work with regions to review §110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2006 24- hour PM2.5 and lead NAAQS. • Work with regions to determine if the extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas have attained by their November 15, 2010 attainment date and work with them on a consistent approach for making determinations that areas attained by their attainment date, or making findings of failure to attain as necessary. • Review quarterly data, and monitor progress of CAFO monitoring study. • Review monitoring data and begin development of CAFO emission estimation methodologies. • Coordinate best management practice (BMP) studies with USDA for CAFO minimizing emissions. • Continue outreach and education of public and animal industry on CAFO air emission issues. • Explore/evaluate potential tools to develop the CAFO process-based model for emission estimates. • Provide technical direction to industry/academic groups conducting their own CAFO studies so their quality assurance and monitoring protocols will be consistent with the National Air Emissions Monitoring Study (NAEMS). • Provide support on integrated and multi-pollutant air pollution planning activities. • Work with regions on development and review of fee programs to satisfy CAA §185. • Issue Notice of Rulemaking for NO2 /SO2 secondary NAAQS for welfare effects. • Early in 2011, issue final implementation rule for 2010 ozone NAAQS. Final Guidance May?, 2010 22 of 63 ------- • Work with regions on a consistent approach for designating areas for the 2010 ozone NAAQS. • Develop baselines for measuring air quality in areas with potential environmental justice concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).) • Improve analytical tools to assess environmental justice impacts of rulemakings. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).) • Improve communication and outreach to environmental justice communities to promote meaningful involvement in the rulemaking process. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 1 (see Appendix G).) • Develop a web-based SIP resource center and SIP best practices. • Administer a wood smoke reduction program. • Issue guidance (or updated guidance) on exceptional events. Regions • Review air quality reports and work with states to develop appropriate actions to bring new violating attainment areas into compliance with the NAAQS. • Take final rulemaking action within 18 months of receipt of any redesignation request that is not impacted by national policy developments (such as the Transport Rule). • Track allowable and actual processing times for SIPs processed during the fiscal year and submit midyear and end-of-year reports to the National SIP Processing Workgroup. • Manage the processing of SIP revisions to ensure final rulemaking actions on all ozone and PM2.5 SIPs are completed consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. • Process voluntary and mandatory reclassifications for 8-hour ozone areas. • Coordinate with states, tribes, and local governments on designating initial nonattainment areas for the lead NAAQS. • Take final rulemaking actions on remaining 1997 PM2.5 and 1997 8-hr ozone NAAQS SIP submittals (e.g., RFP, attainment demonstrations). • Make attainment determinations for 1997 PM2 5 nonattainment areas with an April 5, 2010 attainment date and 1997 8-hr ozone areas with a June 15, 2010 attainment date. • Issue clean air determination actions and grant one-year extensions, as appropriate, for 1997 PM2.s nonattainment areas with an April 5, 2010 attainment date. • Issue attainment determination actions for 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas with a June 15, 2010 attainment date including mandatory reclassifications, clean air data findings, or one-year attainment extension date. • Coordinate with states and tribes on areas designated nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and begin assisting them to develop plans to attain the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. • Support state monitoring network and tribal implementation of lead and rural ozone monitors. • Assist states to develop and submit SIPs due for the 1997 8-hr ozone Subpart 1 nonattainment areas that were reclassified to Subpart 2. • Assist states to develop timely §110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submittals for the 2008 lead NAAQS for submission in 2011. • Work with the regions to take final approval on the 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP submittals for 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS that were due in September 2009. Work with states to determine if the extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas have attained by their November 15, 2010 attainment date. Final Guidance May?, 2010 23 of 63 ------- • Coordinate with states, tribes, and local governments on developing air quality forecasting for ozone and PM2.5 and in enhancing public reporting (http: //envirofl ash. info). • Work with and assist Regional enforcement staff. • Work with states to recognize and address environmental justice issues that can be addressed in SIPs. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).) Regional Haze - FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Continue to coordinate with Federal Land Managers on regional haze issues. • Continue to coordinate with regions and provide technical and policy assistance on regional haze SIPs. • Assist the regions with any Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) needed to meet the regional haze requirements. Regions • Manage the processing of SIP revisions to ensure final rulemaking actions on all regional haze SIPs are completed consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. NAAQS Ambient Monitoring - Remaining FY 2010 Priorities, and FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Provide technical monitoring support for revised NAAQS and NAAQS reviews. • Manage the national contracts for filter purchases, and the national contract for laboratory analysis of filters for speciation including providing data to review by states and submitting data to AQS. • Monitor timeliness and completeness on the national scale for EPA-supported monitoring and flag still-unresolved issues for Regional Office resolution. • Review data certification documentation and set certification flags on AQS data where certification/QA requirements have been met. • Complete Management System Reviews of at least two Regional monitoring programs. • Publish/Prepare National report on precision and bias performance by September 30, 2010. • Coordinate with regions to ensure the independent QA of NAAQS monitoring sites. • Publish/prepare National report on 2010 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) and National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) findings within two months of each audit and overall by July 1, 2011. • Award/manage interagency agreement with National Park Service for operation of IMPROVE monitors for regional visibility. Allow states and tribes to use this mechanism for IMPROVE-protocol sampling at other locations. • Review and approve/disapprove requests for Federal Equivalent Methods (FEM) for continuous PM2.5 methods within 120 days of completed application, and similarly act on each first request for each Approved Regional Method (ARM). Final Guidance May?, 2010 24 of 63 ------- • Develop ambient monitoring portion of the FY 2012 national program and grant guidance consistent with NAAQS final monitoring rules, the national strategy, in collaboration with state, tribal, and local leadership, and regions by April 2011. • Host next national ambient monitoring conference in partnership with the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. The conference expected to be held early in FY 2012 (i.e., late calendar year 2011). Regions • Identify and resolve completeness and timeliness issues with regard to quarterly data submission by monitoring agencies. • Evaluate submitters' annual data certification requests and documentation and forward to HQ when adequate. • Review the evidence that state/local monitoring programs meet 40 CFR Part 58 appendices A, C, D, and E as applicable (evidence is a required element in annual monitoring plans due July 1) and seek corrective action by monitoring agencies where needed. • Review requests for changes in state monitoring plans and act on them within 120 days. • Manage contracts for independent performance audits of state/local monitor networks (PEP and NPAP), for those states choosing that approach to independent audits (some regions only). • Perform Technical Systems Audits on 1/3 of reporting organizations, or as required to achieve an audit of each agency within a 3-year period. • Transfer State and Tribal Air Grant (STAG) funds to OAQPS for any additional state/tribal IMPROVE-protocol sites requested by state, tribal, or local agencies by May 2011 for monitoring to begin/continue in July 2011. Title V and NSR - FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Support regions in issuing permits and evaluating Title V and NSR permit programs. • Support and maintain Title V permit activity database (TOPS). • Support tribal efforts in developing Title V and NSR permitting programs and delegation requests. • Continue to assist regions on NSR regulatory revisions and proposed regulations. • Continue to assist regions in implementing the final regulations for permitting new and modified sources in Indian country. • Continue to modify existing NSR permit regulations, as necessary, to be consistent with the ozone and PM NAAQS. • Prepare and issue final orders on citizen petitions based on drafts from regions. • Provide training and technical guidance to regions and states. • Develop sector- and source-specific guidance that will help permitting authorities and affected sources better understand program requirements for GHGs, GHG emissions for the selected source categories, methods for estimating those emissions, control strategies for GHG emissions, and available GHG measurement and monitoring techniques. • Incorporate environmental justice considerations into permitting guidance. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).) Final Guidance May?, 2010 25 of 63 ------- Regions • Review proposed initial, significant modifications and renewal operating permits, as necessary, to ensure consistent implementation of the Title V program. • Report active Title V permits via the Title V Operating Permits database (TOPS) and update all applicable TOPS data. • For purposes of updating TOPs, report outstanding renewals of Title V permits (permits older than 5 years that have not been renewed). • Issue Title V permits to respond to objections when permitting authority fails to act. • Continue working on completing, per agreed upon schedules, remaining first-round Title V program evaluations pursuant to March 2002 Office of Inspector General (OIG) report. • Prepare draft orders to citizen (public) petitions based upon OAQPS' petition handling process. • Perform 1/4 of follow-up Title V program evaluations for programs with at least 20 permits pursuant to February 2005 OIG report and set target to issue evaluation report within the fiscal year. • Issue PSD and Part 71 permits in Indian country. Regions will issue PSD permits within one year of receipt of a complete application. • Continue to assist permitting authorities on NSR regulatory revisions and proposed regulations. • Evaluate NSR permit programs, as warranted and set target to issue reports within 120 days of evaluation. • Provide training and technical guidance and support to permitting authorities and the public, as necessary. • Take action on all NSR SIPs/TIPs. • Continue issuance of Title V permits on tribal and other federal lands, as necessary. • Review major NSR/PSD permits for new and modified sources, as necessary, to ensure consistent implementation of the NSR program. • Provide End of Year Regional Progress Report for status of EPA review of NSR permits. Air Toxics Program To reduce exposure to air toxics, EPA develops and issues federal standards for major stationary sources and area sources, and conducts national, regional, and community-based efforts to reduce risks from air toxics. EPA develops and refines tools, training, handbooks, and information to assist partners in characterizing risks from air toxics, and works with them on strategies for making local decisions to reduce those risks. EPA will work with state and local agencies to expand the national toxics monitoring network with a particular focus on community-scale assessments, and will compile and analyze information from local assessments to better characterize risk and assess priorities. The toxics program and strategies include the following: • Work with partners to: (1) improve the technical specifications and procedures for the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) ambient monitoring network, (2) support short-duration local-scale (also known as community-scale) monitoring studies, and (3) develop improved emission factors. (Federal funding support for the NATTS network Final Guidance May?, 2010 26 of 63 ------- and local-scale monitoring studies is addressed under the State and Local Air Quality Management section below, and in Appendix C.) • Implement a residual risk program and support community assessment and risk reduction projects, and compile and analyze the information collected from them to better characterize risk and assess priorities for further action. These air toxics mandates will be used as a driver for multi-pollutant reductions. • Write rules for source categories (Note: Rules are listed under the Federal Stationary Source Regulations subheading earlier in this chapter). • Provide technical expertise and support to state, tribal, and local air toxics programs in assessing and reducing major stationary source, area source, and mobile source air toxics. • Continue to develop and improve risk assessments and management methodologies. • Develop and implement innovative emission reduction approaches. • Work with communities through EPA's Communities for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program and other community-based efforts to address environmental justice issues that are associated with disproportionate exposure to air toxics. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) • Improve analytical tools to assess environmental justice and improve communications and outreach to promote meaningful involvement of these communities in the rulemaking process. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goals 1, 2, and 3 (see Appendix G).) • EPA activities that assist in the toxics reduction strategy include the NEI, NATA, NAP A, air quality modeling, the National Clean Diesel Campaign, and data analysis programs. In addition, the Air Toxics Monitoring Program indirectly and in some cases directly supports all the technical tools as well as the programs noted above. Air Toxics Implementation - FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Support the new Emission Inventory System (EIS) and finalize the 2008 Inventory. • Begin development of the 2008 NAT A/NAP A assessment • Work with regions, states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement community-based air toxics programs that address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources, including areas near schools and areas with potential environmental justice concerns. This includes efforts that support the Urban Air Toxics Strategy, Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program, and joint OAR-OECA toxics initiative. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) • Continue developing tools and guidance for communities. Final Guidance May?, 2010 27 of 63 ------- • Develop baselines for measuring air quality in areas with potential environmental justice concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 3 (see Appendix G).) • Undertake biannual assessments of the environmental benefits being achieved in environmental justice areas as a result of diesel emission reduction programs. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 4 (see Appendix G).) • Continue to oversee and approve qualification of Phase 2 for outdoor hydronic heaters. • Coordinate with specific regions to implement the Sustainable Skylines Initiative by working with cities and tribes that have already received grants. • Continue to implement partnership programs for biomass fueled appliances, e.g., hydronic heaters, low-mass fireplaces. • Continue to redesign our emission factors program as described under "Federal Support for Air Quality Management." Regions • Work with states, tribes, and local governments on reviewing the draft 2008 NATA/NAPA • Review new NEI process and EIS components and assist states, tribes, and local governments with similar reviews. • Provide feedback to HQ on new NEI process and EIS components. • Work with HQ on developing risk-based programs and assist in developing area source standards. • Work with states, tribes, and local governments to: (1) implement a residual risk program, and (2) assess and address the combined impact of multiple sources of air toxics, encouraging voluntary reductions of air toxics from indoor and outdoor sources. • Assist states, tribes, and local governments where appropriate in conducting data analysis and assessment for air quality management implications in general. (Applies to states conducting air toxics monitoring regardless of funding source.) » Work with states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement area source programs. • Delegate and provide implementation assistance to states, tribes, and local governments for section 111, 112, and 129 standards, as needed. • Work with Headquarters to implement section 111, 112 and 129 standards, including Federal 11 l(d)/129 plans, in areas where states do not. • As appropriate, provide assistance, data, and information to HQ in order to help facilitate revisions/amendments to section 111,11 l(d), 112 and 129 rules and associated Federal Plans. • Work with HQ, states, tribes, and local governments to develop and implement community-based air toxics programs that address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources, including areas near schools and areas with potential environmental justice concerns. This includes efforts that support the Urban Air Toxics Strategy, Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) program, and joint OAR-OECA toxics initiative. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) • As appropriate, participate in residual risk analyses for MACT and/or GACT standard source categories, and standard setting process. • Provide training to states, tribes, and local governments on air toxics program requirements. Final Guidance May?, 2010 28 of 63 ------- • Work with state, tribes, and local governments to implement woodsmoke reduction programs. • Work with HQ to implement the Sustainable Skylines Initiative by providing support to cities and Tribes that have already received grants. Air Toxic Monitoring - FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Transfer 103 funds for National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) grants to affected Regional Offices. • Manage national contract for NATTS lab analysis. • Conduct Proficiency Testing and Technical System Audits for national contract lab and state/local labs servicing NATTS, and report results within 60 days of audit after opportunity for state/local lab review of draft audit report. • Provide national/regional-scale analysis of currently available air toxics data by September 2011, with conclusions relevant to air quality management and to establishing future goals for the NATTS program and other monitoring initiatives. • Hold National Air Toxics Data Analysis Workshop in 2011 or present information as part of National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference. • Monitor NATTS data submissions for completeness and timeliness. • Conduct a grant competition for community-scale air toxics ambient monitoring projects. Provide guidance to regions for negotiating individual grants to ensure that data meet risk screening, risk characterization, and/or risk assessment requirements where appropriate given study objectives that were material in selecting the project for funding. • Provide mechanism for optional participation in Proficiency Testing and Technical System Audits by labs which are not direct NATTS participants. (Cost would be borne by the approved state/local lab.) • Provide tools and guidance for analyzing local air toxics data. • Review Technical Assistance Document and update if appropriate. • Expand air toxics monitoring in low income and minority communities and take next steps on school toxics monitoring initiative. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) Regions • Ensure NATTS work plans are consistent with program office template guidance. • Ensure NATTS QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to AQS. • Participate in at least 50% of NATTS TSA lab and field site audits. • Track status and coordinate needed follow-up actions between the program office and states, tribes, and local agencies in support of the NATTS QA program (e.g., TSA and PT activities). • Identify and resolve completeness and timeliness issues with regard to quarterly data submission by monitoring agencies. • Award the community scale air toxics ambient monitoring grants, as applicable. • Assist states, tribes, and local governments in siting, installing, and operating new and upgraded toxic monitoring equipment for community scale grant projects. Final Guidance May?, 2010 29 of 63 ------- Review Q A programs and ensure compatibility of community scale air toxics measurements across projects and with NATTS, where appropriate. Ensure community scale QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to AQS and/or ensure that the project results meet the requirements of the approved QAPP. Assess and review existing air toxics networks, and assist states, tribes, and local agencies in the siting, installation, and operation of new and upgraded toxic monitoring equipment. Ensure QAPP is adequate to provide quality data for submission to AQS. STATE AND LOCAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT Program Description The state and local air quality management program includes funding and associated program support to assist state and local air pollution control agencies in developing and implementing continuing programs to attain and maintain the NAAQS and to assess, prevent, and control air pollution such as hazardous air pollutants. Continuing program activities include not only state plan preparation and implementation for the NAAQS, but also related air quality monitoring and network upkeep, emission inventories, modeling and analysis, permitting, and conducting oversight and compliance activity associated with non-TitleV sources including small and area air toxics sources, providing technical assistance, and responding to citizen complaints. The annual details of many of these activities, including the HQ and Regional Office roles, are articulated in the 'priorities' sections of the various program descriptions. The program also provides funding to interstate transport commissions, and other multi- jurisdictional organizations (composed of state and local agency representation) to help coordinate air quality improvement efforts. Funding is also provided to reduce diesel emissions from the existing diesel fleet, including stationary diesel engines and school buses using authority provided under the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Funding may be available on a competitive or a formula basis depending upon the nature of diesel program component and the entities eligible. State and local agencies also maintain Title V operating permit programs for major stationary and other sources. Title V activities are funded through operating permit fees and are not grant- eligible. Further, Title V permit fees cannot be used to fund grant-eligible activities. Program Strategy EPA's overall strategy for achieving clean outdoor air includes a comprehensive, multi- pollutant approach that combines national, regional, and local measures with responsibilities for implementation carried out by the most appropriate and effective level of government. Typically, problems with broad national or global impact are best handled at the federal level. State and local agencies can best address regional and local problems that remain after federal measures are applied. Inherent in these efforts is EPA's policy to ensure that collaborative and timely consultation occurs with its partners in the areas of planning, priority-setting, budgeting, Final Guidance May?, 2010 30 of 63 ------- and implementation. It is EPA's policy to seek prior consultation with partners on the allocation and use of grant resources. This guidance reflects input from states, local agencies, and tribes on EPA's continuing efforts to identify and resolve issues associated with the purposes, distribution, and use of grant resources. In implementing the state and local air quality management component of this strategy EPA will: • Work with state, local, and other governmental partners to target available STAG resources to those air pollution problems which pose the greatest risk to public health (e.g., fine particles, ozone, and hazardous air pollutants; disparate impacts affecting low- income, minority, tribal or other disadvantaged populations); • Secure and allocate resources to address not only the attainment of PM2.5, ozone, and other NAAQS, but also support ongoing state and local air program operations and delegated programs which help maintain healthy air quality; • Encourage support for regional and community-scale strategies that complement the impacts of federal measures (e.g.: action day programs; air quality reporting; wood smoke reduction programs; diesel retrofits and other mobile source initiatives; and, integrated air toxics monitoring, risk assessment, and reduction projects); • Provide support to assist states, tribes, and local agencies to develop air quality forecasting programs, especially the addition of forecasting particle pollution; • Target significant resources to recipients to develop, refine, and maintain monitoring systems and emission inventories which help provide a clear picture of the nature and sources of air pollution and help gauge the impacts of preventive and mitigative measures employed; • Support the efforts of states and multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) to develop information and strategies for use by states and tribes in reducing haze and improving visibility across the country, including formerly pristine areas; • Provide resources that focus on transboundary or binational, geographically-specific environmental issues involving a multi-pollutant, multi-state, and sometimes a multi- media approach; • Provide support for training and other associated program support to assist state, local, multi-state, and other agencies in addressing their air pollution problems; • Provide training and technical support to assist states, tribes, and local agencies in developing and conducting wood boiler and wood stove changeout programs to reduce particle pollution; to implement a clean burning education campaign; and, • Provide resources to eligible entities to support diesel engine retrofits, rebuilds and replacements, and idling reduction technologies that target reductions from the existing diesel fleet. Grant Assistance to Co-Implementors: FY 2011 Increases The President's FY 2011 budget request includes a total of $390.72 million in STAG funds for outdoor and indoor air grant programs carried out by multi-state, state, local and tribal agencies, and other eligible entities. This is a significant increase of $85 million over the FY 2009 level and $82.5 million over the FY 2010 enacted level. Of this amount, $309.08 million is targeted for continuing air programs carried out by state and local air agencies. An increase of Final Guidance May?, 2010 31 of 63 ------- $266K has also been requested for tribal air programs while requests for the state indoor radon and diesel emission reduction grant programs have not changed. The FY 2011 request does not include funds for two areas funded in FY 2010: Climate Showcase and Targeted Airshed grants. Table 2 compares the FY 2011 request to FY 2009 and FY 2010 enacted levels. Table 2 - Comparison of State and Tribal Assistance Grants for Air: FYs 2009-FY 2011 (in $M) Program Area Continuing State/Local Air Program Diesel Emission Reduction Program* State Indoor Radon Tribal Air Program** Climate Showcase Communities Targeted Airshed Grants CA Emission Reduction Project Grants Total FY 2009 Enacted $224.080 $60.000 $8.074 $13.300 $10.000 $15.000 $330.540 FY 2010 Enacted $226.580 $60.000 $8.074 $13.300 $10.000 $20.000 $337.954 President's FY 201 1 Request $309.080 $60.000 $8.074 $13.566 $390.720 * Includes Clean School Bus Initiative funds. ** The President's request also includes significant increases in the Tribal General Assistance Program and a new Tribal Multimedia Implementation grant program that could benefit tribal air programs. The President's budget request divides the $85 million increase into three components: $45 million to support the expanded core state and local agency workload associated with implementing the additional ozone, NC>2, 862, lead, and fine particulate NAAQS and addressing risks from air toxics; $25 million to address development of state and local technical capacity to address GHG emissions in permitting of large sources identified pursuant to regulation under the CAA; and, $15 million specifically targeted for the increased number of monitors required by the new or revised NAAQS. Core Activities: State and local agencies, which have been grappling with constrained budgets, are also facing an increasing workload as EPA updates and issues more protective NAAQS. The NAAQS have triggered, and will continue to trigger, the preparation of new or updated SIPs. Due to the multi-pollutant, and often regional nature of air pollution, preparation and implementation of the plans to deal with it will become increasingly complex requiring additional modeling, technical analysis, updated emission inventories, monitoring, and increased stakeholder involvement and coordination. The $45 million is intended to supplement the existing level of funds that state and local agencies have been using for continuing program responsibilities. In a recent retreat with the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA), EPA agreed to joint discussions with state and local representatives on the implementation of various aspects of the continuing air program. As part of this collaborative effort, EPA sought and received specific comments on the distribution and use of state/local grant resources and these comments were considered in the development of the Agency's preliminary allocation of FY 2011 STAG resources. A preliminary national (region-by-region) allocation of these funds is included in Appendix B of the guidance, but discussions on the allocation continue and the allocations will change. Increasing Capacity for GHG Permitting: While initial rules and guidance covering the permitting of sources to include GHG emissions will be issued during FY 2010, EPA anticipates Final Guidance May 7, 2010 32 of 63 ------- that state and local agencies with approved or delegated permitting authority will require additional grant resources to effectively prepare for increased GHG-related program responsibilities. This includes staff development and training, program planning and analysis, source identification, outreach to industry, and responding to the public. EPA is still developing an allocation rationale for these funds and will be requesting additional comment from states, locals, and tribes before issuing a final allocation within the next several months. Monitoring: The CAA requires EPA to review each of the NAAQS every five years. Each revision of the NAAQS provides greater protection of public health and may place new monitoring requirements on our state and local partners. The additional funding requested for FY 2011 will help defray the purchase costs of new monitors for ozone, lead, SC>2, and NC>2 for state and local agencies. Air monitoring is addressed in greater detail in Appendix C. The Agency is still in the process of developing a detailed allocation for these resources. The allocation will largely be influenced by the final NAAQS rules. Other Grant Programs A discussion of state indoor radon grants can be found in the Indoor Environments chapter of the guidance. Also note that information on allocation of tribal air grants will be provided at a later date. The EPA Tribal air program contact is Barrel Harmon at 202-564-7416. Finally, information on competitive grant opportunities and programs is typically provided via separate announcement at: http://www.epa.gov/air/grants funding.html. Diesel Emission Reductions Grant Program The budget request for FY 2011 also includes funds to support the Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA), part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. This includes funding for competitive federal grants to reduce diesel emissions from the existing fleet. Sections 791-797 of the Energy Policy Act authorize these grant funds which will support implementation of the National Clean Diesel Campaign. Through the Diesel Emission Reduction Program (DERA), OAR will continue its focus on reducing PM emissions from existing diesel engines (which are not subject to the new, more stringent emission standards that took effect in 2007 and later). These engines often remain in service for 20 or more years, and this program will help provide immediate reductions by retrofitting these engines with emission control technologies sooner than would otherwise occur through normal turnover of the fleet. Implementation of the program will produce criteria air pollutant and air toxics benefits. In FY 2011, EPA expects to fund at least 100 additional new grants deploying technology in various sectors using diesel engines. This program will support grants and loans for diesel engine retrofits, rebuilds, replacements, cleaner fuels, idling reduction measures and low-cost revolving loans. Up to 30% of the funds for diesel emissions reduction grants may again be appropriated to provide formula grants to states to establish and support state clean diesel grant or loan programs. Final Guidance May?, 2010 33 of 63 ------- The Agency's strategy to implement this program and disseminate its associated clean diesel funding is dependent on the actual appropriation levels and any accompanying language regarding implementation. In addition, the timing of the actual appropriation will dictate when EPA will publish its national announcement of funding availability. For more information contact Jennifer Keller at 202-343-9541 or via email at keller.jennifer@epa.gov. Clean Air Act Training Section 103(b) of the CAA authorizes EPA to provide training for air pollution control personnel and agencies and to make training grants to air pollution control agencies and other qualified entities related to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution. In addition to the Agency resources that EPA targets, EPA is again targeting approximately $2 million in STAG funds for the support of CAA training provided by multi-jurisdictional organizations and other state training programs in FY 2011. These funds are subject to consultation and concurrence with participating state and local air pollution control agencies. For more information contact Debbie Stackhouse in OAQPS at 919-541-5281. Northeast Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) The OTC was created pursuant to sections 176A and 184 of the CAA and is funded under CAA §106. The OTC represents Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic States in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) in: a) assessing interstate transport of ozone and its precursors; and b) determining the need for, and appropriateness of, additional control measures within the OTR, or areas affecting the OTR. The OTC is supported by a small executive staff that functions largely to coordinate OTC activities, facilitate communication among members, and serve as the point of contact for organizations external to the OTC, including EPA. The OTC also serves as the regional haze planning organization for the OTR, in concert with the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association. For FY 2011, the OTC's activity is expected to continue to focus on six areas: general analytical support to member states; analysis of mobile, stationary, and area source measures, particularly new clean air technologies; member communications; solicitation of non- governmental stakeholder input; coordination with other organizations; and consensus building. The focus areas are supported by OTC committees that develop and recommend specific action items for the Commission and the member states. The OTC implements its policy recommendations through consensus resolutions and draft model rules that provide guidance to member states. For more information contact Pat Childers in OAR at 202-564-1082, or at childers.pat@epa.gov. Multi-Jurisdictional Organizations (MJOs) National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) NACAA is the national association of state, territorial, and local air pollution control agencies. It comprises representatives from member air pollution control agencies and is supported by a small staff in Washington, D.C. Member agencies support NACAA with their STAG funds. They do this by either providing their prior consent to EPA to target a portion of the funds that would otherwise be allotted to them instead for direct award to NACAA; or Final Guidance May?, 2010 34 of 63 ------- they direct that NACAA bill them directly for their membership contribution. Section 105 recipients who are not members of NACAA do not have their allotments affected. The award of funds to NACAA is still subject to review by the Agency including the applicability of the Agency's Competition Policy. See Appendix B. NACAA provides associated program support to its member state and local agencies by coordinating the air quality activities of state and local air pollution control officials at the national level and engaging in activities that enhance the effectiveness of their agencies. This includes: the dissemination of information to membership via electronic and print means, support for member technical advisory committees, planning and sponsoring of air quality conferences and technical workshops, serving as a state/local liaison to EPA, coordination of member participation on EPA and joint State-EPA technical committees, production of technical assistance for members such as model rules and implementation strategies, and addressing air pollution control issues in concert with other public and private interests. For more information, contact William Houck at 202-564-1349 or via email at houck.william@epa.gov. Regional-level Multi-Jurisdictional Organizations Numerous state and local agencies have found it advantageous to form multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJOs) to help coordinate their geographically-specific clean air interests at the regional level. These organizations typically comprise the member agencies and develop relevant mission statements, charters and budgets. A state or local agency wishing to fund an MJO may: a) direct that the EPA Regional Office set aside that agency's desired contribution from its prospective portion of the regional allotment (i.e., on a pre-allotment basis); or, b) directly fund the organization once the state or local agency receives its allotment. An EPA Region may provide STAG funding to such an organization using §103 authority only if the contributing agencies provide their prior consent, the MJO is eligible for the funding, and the MJO's activities are appropriate as associated program support. Additionally, EPA must make a finding as to whether the organization should receive its grant on a non-competitive basis consistent with the Agency's Competition Policy. See Appendix B. Funding for these regional MJOs is not delineated as part of the national region-by-region allocation of STAG funds but is instead identified within the respective Region's allotments to its state and local agencies. Regional Planning Organizations Regional Haze Planning Organizations (RPOs), drawn from existing multi-jurisdictional organizations, were created to assist states, tribes and other stakeholders in identifying, analyzing, and addressing their multi-jurisdictional regional haze and visibility problems. The RPOs were instrumental in providing states, locals, and tribes with the needed materials to complete the preparation of the required Regional Haze SIPs. The plans were due to EPA from the states by December 17, 2007. Many state plans have not yet been submitted or are not yet able to be approved. EPA ended dedicated funding for regional haze RPOs in FY 2009. For information on current RPO functions please contact Jeff Whitlow in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards at 919-541-5523. Final Guidance May?, 2010 35 of 63 ------- The Agency has continued to receive comments from some states and tribes that key analytical tools, expertise, and the regional forums that the regional haze planning organizations provided merit continued support. Their point is that continued support for RPOs is needed not only for future regional haze SIP work but also for broader regional planning needs given the regional nature of air pollution and the increasingly complex plans and strategies necessary to address it—i.e., regional air quality management strategies based on additional and more complex modeling, refined emissions inventories, and increased stakeholder involvement. To address these concerns, OAR and NACAA have established a workgroup to examine the continued need, available resources, and optimum organizational structure for support of broader, multi-pollutant and regional planning. OAR will be seeking additional input from state, local, and tribal agencies, multi-jurisdictional organizations, and other stakeholders on this matter. For additional information on this effort please contact Jerry Kurtzweg in the Office of Air and Radiation at 202-564-1234. NAAOS - FY 2011 Priorities Regions should: • Work with states to review air quality reports and take appropriate actions to eliminate future violations in attainment areas that violate any of the NAAQS. States should: • As appropriate, submit redesignation requests including maintenance plans for areas with clean air quality data. • Submit NAAQS pollutant data, PAMS, and QA data to AQS directly or indirectly through another organization according to schedule in 40 CFR Part 58 (applies to all state/local primary quality assurance organizations). • Continue to implement SIPs for 1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS. • Submit any outstanding PM2.5 and ozone SIP elements. • Consult with EPA as necessary to finalize area designations for the lead NAAQS. • Implement NOx and SO2 requirements under CAIR. • Begin planning for 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS SIPs due no later than December 2012. • Information regarding lessons learned from the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) pilot projects in the States of New York and North Carolina and in the city of St. Louis (Missouri and Illinois) will be available in spring 2010. States should refer to this information and should begin to integrate activities affecting or affected by air quality (e.g. land use, transportation, energy, climate, environmental justice, and ecosystem impacts) into their planning efforts. • Conduct public notification and education efforts, including reporting air quality forecasts and current conditions for ozone and particle pollution. • Implement strategies for controlling emissions from wood smoke where it is a primary contribution to air quality problems. Final Guidance May?, 2010 36 of 63 ------- Regional Haze - 2011 Priorities States should: • Continue to work with regions on issues related to submitted regional haze SIPs. • Implement BART requirements. • Submit any outstanding regional haze SIP elements. NAAQS Ambient Monitoring - 2011 Priorities Regions should: • Work with states to ensure that state monitoring networks for NAAQS, NCore, PM2 5 speciation, and PAMS meet applicable regulatory and guidance requirements. States should: • Implement lead monitoring at near-source locations. • Plan to implement lead monitoring at non near-source locations as part of each state's annual monitoring network plan due to EPA by July 1, 2010. • Submit 2012 annual network plan required by 40 CFR § 58.10, by July 1, 2011 unless another schedule has been approved (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement). The plan should provide for the movement or start-up of additional ozone monitoring stations associated with smaller urban areas and non-urban areas, if required. • Operate monitors for other NAAQS pollutants, NCore, PM2.5 speciation, and PAMS according to 40 CFR Part 58, approved monitoring plans, and/or grant agreements including QMPs and QAPPs. • Submit NAAQS pollutant data, PAMS, NCore and QA data to AQS according to schedule in 40 CFR Part 58. • Certify 2010 NAAQS pollutant data in AQS and provide supporting documentation by May 1, 2011 (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement). • Ensure adequate, independent QA audits of NAAQS monitors, including PEP and NPAP or equivalent (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement). • Conduct monthly QA checks for flow rates of PM2.s speciation monitors and submit data quarterly to AQS. Target is for 75% completeness, (state/local only, unless tribal work plan requirement). • Report real time ozone and PM2.s data to AirNOW for cities required to report the AQI (state/local only). • Implement remaining measurements associated with NCore so that each station is ready for full operation by January 1, 2011. Air Toxics Ambient Monitoring - 2011 Priorities Regions should: • Work with states to ensure NATTS sites are operated according to EPA's technical guidance and the QAPP and QMP. States should: • Operate NATTS sites according to national technical guidance and the QAPP and QMP. Final Guidance May?, 2010 37 of 63 ------- • Participate in inter-laboratory Proficiency Testing and Technical System Audit programs according to national guidance and the approved QAPP and QMP (state/local only). • Submit NATTS data to AQS quarterly, within 120 days of end of each quarter. The data objective for completeness rate is 85% of the potential concentration values for each quarter (state/local only). • Conduct federally-funded community assessment projects consistent with grant terms (including schedule), technical guidance, and QAPP and QMP (state/local/tribal). • Submit data from federally-funded community monitoring projects to AQS quarterly, within 120 days of end of each quarter. The data objective for completeness rate is 85% of the potential concentration values for the study period (state/local/tribal). • Operate study sites based on the terms of QAPP and QMP (state/local/tribal). • Submit data to AQS quarterly. The target data completeness rate is 85% of the potential concentration values submitted within 120 days of end of each quarter (state/local/tribal). Title V and NSR - 2011 Priorities Regions should: • Work with states to assist states in developing the technical capacity to address GHG emissions in the permitting of large sources States should: • Ensure sources submit Title V applications for renewal. • Provide timeliness data on new title V permits and significant permit modifications to EPA Regional Offices for entry into TOPS. • Continue to issue initial permits, significant modifications, and renewal Title V permits and reduce backlog of renewal permits. • Cooperate with EPA in Title V permit program evaluations, set target to respond within 90 days to EPA's evaluation report and implement recommendations as warranted. • Issue new Title V permits and significant permit modifications within 18 months of application completeness determined by permitting authority. • Issue 78 % of maj or NSR permits within one year of receiving a complete permit application. • Issue NSR permits consistent with CAA requirements and enter BACT/LAER determinations in the RBLC. • Provide timeliness data on NSR permits issued for new major sources and major modifications by entering data including "the application accepted date" and "the permit issuance date" in to the RBLC national database. Air Toxics Implementation - 2011 Priorities States should: • Quality assure, validate, and revise NEI facility data using EIS components. • Collect data for the integrated 2008 HAP emissions inventory. • Implement delegated or approved section 112, 11 l(d) and 129 standards, as appropriate, for major sources and area sources. • Implement delegated residual risk standards. Final Guidance May?, 2010 38 of 63 ------- • Work with communities to develop and implement voluntary air toxics programs that address outdoor, indoor, and mobile sources with emphasis on areas with potential environmental justice concerns. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) Use of the Exchange Network for Reporting Air Quality Monitoring Results In a July 2009 memorandum, EPA Administrator Jackson made enhanced use of the National Environmental Information Exchange Network a part of her strategic vision for the Agency. She wrote in response to a unanimous request from the Environmental Council of the States emerging from their spring 2009 meeting that she intends "the Agency to work with the states to set an aggressive timetable for completing the transition to the Exchange Network (EN) for regulatory and national system reporting...." She directed the NPMs to work to achieve the vision of the Network as "the preferred way EPA, states, tribes, and others share and exchange data." She added "I look forward to reviewing our progress toward achieving this goal...." In response to this direction from the Administrator, OAR places a high priority on increasing the use of the EN for the transmission of air quality measurement data from states, tribes, and localities to EPA. OAR Actions As part of preparing this guidance EPA has examined the current process for submitting Air Quality data, and will do the following in FY 2011 to address potential obstacles to increased use of the exchange network: • Deploy enhanced Central Data Exchange (CDX) EN client, allowing users with a valid account to submit air quality data from any computer with a web browser or desktop client; • Modify software to simplify the EN submission work flow by eliminating the need for the current "two step" process of data submission and verification when using the EN; • Make available information, tools, and guidance needed to convert "flat files" to the EN XML standard; and, • Develop and conduct necessary training sessions for staff submitting air quality measurement results in conjunction with the regions and ECOS Regions should Using the resources developed in FY 2010, regions should work with states to: • Increase exchange network submissions to at least half of all state submissions per Region during 2011 • Increase XML submissions to all or all but one of state submissions in each Region by 2012 • Encourage the use of the exchange network by non state submitters of air quality information by making the EN client, XML tools and the necessary training available to them. Final Guidance May?, 2010 39 of 63 ------- TRIBAL AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT The national Tribal Air Quality Management Program includes funding for Indian tribes and Tribal Air Pollution Control Agencies, as well as providing training and support for tribes with typically small staffs and limited resources. Through CAA §103 grants, tribal air pollution control agencies, among others, may conduct and promote research, investigations, experiments, demonstrations, surveys, studies and training related to air pollution. Tribes typically use this funding source to research and investigate the air quality within, and emissions sources affecting, lands within their jurisdiction. Through CAA §105 grants, tribes may develop and implement programs for the prevention and control of air pollution or for the implementation of national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards, NSR and permit programs, and delegated federal programs like Part 71 and MACT standards. Tribes have the authority to set standards and develop additional programs to meet their unique needs. This authority is grounded in the CAA and the Tribal Authority Rule, as well as their inherent sovereign authority. EPA is committed to work with the tribes, our regulatory partners, to assist them in understanding their air quality, completing air quality assessments, setting appropriate air quality goals, and developing air quality management programs appropriate to meet those goals. The completion of air quality assessments in Indian country is achieved through a combination of training and technical support of tribal staff in areas such as conducting assessments, source characterizations, emission inventories, monitoring programs, modeling, and other analyses, as appropriate. At the same time, work continues to improve and facilitate tribal participation in the policy and programmatic aspects of the national air quality management program. As tribes gain experience, they are then better able to address their air quality concerns, and enhance their overall program development and participation. EPA is committed to supporting the National Tribal Air Association (NTAA) as a leadership and coordination organization, working to promote relationships between and amongst tribes and EPA. NTAA serves an important role in facilitating tribal involvement in EPA policy and regulatory development. EPA is also committed to building tribal capacity, where appropriate, to implement—either directly through tribal regulations and Tribal Implementation Plans (TIPs), Title V programs, or as partners in implementation of applicable Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs)—CAA protections for human health and the environment for federally-recognized tribes. A primary mechanism for this priority is to fund the American Indian Air Quality Training Program (AIAQTP) in its role as a leader in tribal air quality training and technical support. The AIAQTP provides a curriculum developed especially for the unique needs of Indian country. This program has been instrumental in assisting tribes to develop the necessary skills to start and implement air quality management programs in Indian country. The AIAQTP and EPA together implement the Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center. Grant Assistance to Tribes Tribal STAG funds are allocated to tribes through each Regional Office (except Region 3 which has no federally-recognized tribes) based on a formula that includes factors such as tribal population, number of tribes, nonattainment areas, and number of Title V sources. Regional Final Guidance May?, 2010 40 of 63 ------- offices then allocate funds to tribes based on additional factors related to risk, environmental goals, and tribal capacity. EPA STAG funding in recent years has been unable to provide grants to every tribe requesting support, so this methodology allows funding decisions to be made in a nationally-consistent manner while seeking to maximize the local environmental benefit. OAR supports many tribal efforts to understand and address air quality, and many tribes include monitoring and emission inventory programs in their activities. OAR provides funding to approximately 52 tribes to monitor a variety of pollutants of concern to them, and many tribes have provided an exemplary level of reliability and data capture in operating monitors of every type. In addition, almost 50 tribes have completed emissions inventories to help determine potential air quality and programmatic concerns for their tribe; some of these tribes have updated their initial emission inventories. To continue the effectiveness and relevancy of these tribal programs, OAR expects the Regional Offices and tribes to jointly determine where monitoring or emissions inventory development is necessary, while OAR provides technical assistance through the Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center. Overall, roughly 100 tribes will receive CAA funding support to develop and operate air quality management programs to address their air quality concerns and participate in the national program. EPA's strategy is to provide flexibility for tribes and Regional Offices to address the many different air quality situations on tribal lands on a case-by-case basis, rather than setting goals for tribes at the national level. Ambient air monitoring often, but not always, will be an appropriate one-time or continuing element of a tribal air quality assessment and management program. Appendix C of this document provides revised interim guidance to help tribal and Regional Office staff achieve clarity on the objectives of monitoring efforts. Tribes are also encouraged (but not required) to develop programs that address air pollution. While tribes may be treated like states for purposes of implementing CAA programs, they are not required to take delegation of programs other that those that they believe are necessary to address their concerns in areas where they have jurisdiction. Tribes are encouraged to develop programs that meet their needs and to participate in local, regional, and national regulatory and policy development. OAR expects tribal grants awarded in FY 2011 to include a commitment for quality-assured monitoring data to be submitted (directly by the tribe or other agreed arrangement) on a timely basis to AQS or other national database (e.g., AQS is not able to directly receive the data from the CASTNET or IMPROVE networks at this time). EPA also encourages tribal participation in forecasting and reporting air quality data to the public, but this should not be a condition required in the grants. In FY 2011, attention should continue to be paid to the quality assurance aspects of tribal air monitoring programs. Every new or renewed grant supporting ambient monitoring on tribal lands should require preparation and Regional Office approval of Quality Management Plans (QMPs) and Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) that clearly identify the purposes to be served by the monitoring. OAR has worked with the regions and monitoring organizations to develop a graded approach for the development of these documents. The QAPP should provide that tribal monitoring include regular precision and accuracy checks, using Appendix A of 40 CFR Part 58 as general guidance, unless other quality assurance procedures are justified as more appropriate to the monitoring objectives. Data reporting to AQS should include reporting of the precision and accuracy check results. The TAMS Center provides training on these QA aspects Final Guidance May?, 2010 41 of 63 ------- of monitoring programs and has developed Turbo-QAPP software approved for use by OAQPS. Tribal QAPPs developed using this software should be generally approvable. Many tribes are very concerned about climate change and its impact on tribes. Tribes often are the first to experience the impact of climate change and are generally less able to address it than states and local agencies. In FY 2011, OAR will work with tribes as the Agency develops climate change policies and/or regulations. Our strategy includes supporting tribal interest in air toxics. Tribes have increased their participation in air toxics issues, but are limited by availability of funding and resources to assess the level of impact and risk. However, tribes continue to be concerned about toxics, and often have disproportional impacts due to subsistence activities and lifestyles. This is particularly true where local problems may be caused by local and regional sources such as residential wood smoke, industrial facilities, and mobile sources. This also applies to toxic deposition and bioaccumulation of persistent bioaccumulative toxins, such as mercury, dioxin, and PCBs. The 229 Alaska Native Villages, many of whom rely on traditional subsistence lifestyles, have expressed particular concern over local and international toxics, and Arctic peoples are known to suffer disproportionately high exposures to these toxic and persistent compounds. We will also work with tribal governments to develop tribal capacity and expertise to directly participate and represent tribal concerns in local, regional, and statewide efforts to understand and address air quality concerns. Finally, to enhance the visibility of the OAR Tribal Program and to further integrate tribal issues and concerns into EPA's daily programmatic activities, regions should, where appropriate, provide the tribes with the funding assistance necessary for reasonable participation in regional and national level conferences, meetings, and planning activities. For example, there are several national conferences on topics such as monitoring, emission inventories, quality assurance, and data analysis. There are also a number of strategic planning efforts underway under the auspices of the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee that could benefit from consistent and meaningful tribal participation. Such provisions should be added, as appropriate, to the tribal grant workplans. Tribes and tribal organizations, as our regulatory partners, should also be invited and encouraged to participate in regional advisory bodies and workgroups to assist EPA in developing and implementing new regulations and policies wherever those actions may affect tribal governments as well as state and local authorities. FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Provide support to tribes and regions for completion of emissions inventories and their submission to the Emissions Inventory System (EIS). • Provide training and technical support to tribes for air quality assessment and monitoring, including submission of quality assured data into the AQS system. • Work with regions to provide air quality outreach and training events to tribal staff, as appropriate. • Support tribal participation in local, regional and national policy developments and actions through the National Tribal Air Association. Final Guidance May?, 2010 42 of 63 ------- • Provide grant and staff support to national tribal organizations to support effective tribal participation in policy development. • Provide grant and staff support for training on national CAA policy issues. • Invite tribes to participate in policy development and implementation workgroups. • Support training for tribes on the SIP process, where state programs may impact tribal lands. • Provide meaningful notice and access to tribes for participation in policy, rule, or program development that may impact them. • Support training for tribes on the TAS and TIP processes. • Review draft FIPs and provide guidance to support Regional Office FIP efforts • Finalize and support Regional and tribal implementation of the tribal NSR rules. • Provide support for toxics training and outreach events to tribes and other opportunities for tribes to participate in air toxics reduction efforts. • Provide support for training to tribes on voluntary programs such as asthma and indoor air. • Provide support for tribal efforts to understand, assess, and respond to indoor air concerns in Indian country. • Work with regions to assist interested tribes in implementing voluntary emission control retrofit programs for existing heavy-duty diesel engines/school buses and wood stove/hydronic heater changeouts. • Continue to support tribes and regions with information and training to address wood smoke emissions, both indoors and out. • Continue to provide guidance to tribes on planning and implementing air monitoring programs. • Continue to support tribal participation in assessment and monitoring activities related to the atmospheric deposition of mercury on tribal lands. • Continue to facilitate distribution of information to tribes by maintaining the TribalAir website and the Tribal Newsletter. • Support and encourage early and frequent consultation with tribal governments on OAR actions that may affect them. • Directly, and working closely with the regions, support tribal efforts to understand, assess, mitigate and adapt to climate change. • Work with regions to implement voluntary programs to integrate nontraditional planning (e.g., land use, transportation, and energy) into air quality management. Regions • Provide grant and technical support to interested tribes for the purpose of conducting air quality management activities. • Provide support to tribal air quality assessment activities such as emissions inventories, monitoring, and submission of monitoring data into national databases as appropriate. • Work with HQ to provide air quality outreach and training events to tribal staff, as appropriate. • Provide grant resources and staff support for tribes to participate in Regional and national level activities. • Provide support for tribes to be an active part in the SIP process, where state programs may impact Indian country. Final Guidance May?, 2010 43 of 63 ------- • Provide grant resources and support to tribes for participation in rule or program development. • Provide support for tribes on the TAS and TIP processes and act on TAS and TIP submittals. • Use Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative Agreement (DITCA) authority to directly implement federal responsibilities as appropriate. • If necessary, identify areas requiring a FIP development and implementation process. • Issue Part 71 and pre-construction (PSD) permits. • Implement and enforce federal standards (NSPS, NESHAP, etc.). • Work with tribes to implement tribal, CAA, and voluntary emission control programs. • Work with tribes to implement NSR in Indian country. • Support tribal capacity building with regard to understanding and addressing air toxics issues impacting Indian country, as needed or appropriate. • Support tribal participation in activities related to regional planning and technical support, particularly as a collaborative effort involving EPA, states, and locals. • Provide support for outreach events to tribes and other opportunities for tribes to participate in air toxics reduction efforts. • Make outreach and training on voluntary programs available to tribes. • Provide support and technical assistance to tribes to understand and address indoor air quality concerns. • Work with HQ and interested tribes in implementing voluntary emission control retrofit programs for existing heavy-duty diesel engines. • Work with HQ and interested tribes in implementing woodstove changeout programs. • Work with HQ to conduct formal consultations with tribal leaders when appropriate. • Support OTS Tribal Database by regularly inputting appropriate data and ensuring tribal accomplishments and activities are accurately described. • Provide support and technical assistance to tribes to address residential wood and coal burning. Tribes • Provide air quality monitoring or assessment data to EPA and/or AQS. • Work with regions to register minor sources for NSR permit planning. • Complete and submit emissions inventories to the EIS. • Attend air quality outreach events; participate in ozone or PM policy development, and/or regulatory response, as appropriate. • Participate in regional and national level meetings, conferences, and teleconferences on CAA policy development and seek training and support to build capability for effective participation. • Participate in CAA rules and policy development that may have potential to impact tribes. • Submit eligibility determinations under the TAR. • Submit TIPs to address air quality conditions for lands within the tribes' jurisdiction. • Assist in FIP development and implementation process, as appropriate. • Review and test new Emissions Inventory process and EIS components. Provide feedback to regions. Final Guidance May?, 2010 44 of 63 ------- Participate in and support the National Tribal Air Association to encourage a strong role for tribes in the development of activities related to regulations, programs and policy development. Provide outreach to tribes on indoor and outdoor air toxics issues. Participate in training and technical support activities conducted as part of the American Indian Air Quality Training Program, including attending workshop training both as students and instructors and assisting tribes in learning from each other. Participate in training on voluntary programs to address air quality concerns. Attend indoor air quality training. Participate in indoor air quality assessment and outreach to tribes. Implement voluntary emission control retrofit programs for existing heavy-duty diesel engines and wood stove and hydronic heater changeout campaigns. Participate in EPA's climate change-related policy and regulatory development activities. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 45 of 63 ------- Climate Protection Through both regulatory and voluntary efforts, EPA will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in ways that promote the President's vision of a clean energy future. Nearly three years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered EPA to determine, based on available scientific evidence, whether GHG emissions from motor vehicles endanger public health and welfare. EPA conducted that inquiry and determined through a public rulemaking that GHG emissions from motor vehicles do endanger public health and welfare. That finding triggered a Clean Air Act (CAA) mandate to issue GHG emissions standards for motor vehicles. EPA also has a number of pending rulemaking petitions and other legal obligations to consider regulating GHGs from a variety of mobile and stationary sources. In responding to these obligations, OAR will consider applying the CAA regulatory authority to GHG emissions in ways that meet our statutory obligations while using common sense approaches that focus requirements on the largest GHG sources and use multi-pollutant, sector-based strategies. In combination with our on-going efforts to continually enhance and refocus our voluntary programs, these actions will encourage cost-effective, energy-efficient operating practices, promote the development and use of innovative technologies, create new green jobs, and most importantly, reduce air pollution that threatens human health contributes to climate change. MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING RULE In September 2009, EPA issued a final rule for mandatory GHG reporting from large GHG emissions sources.9 In developing the reporting requirements, EPA considered the substantial amount of work already completed and underway in many states, regions and voluntary programs. The new reporting requirements apply to suppliers of fossil fuel and industrial chemicals, manufacturers of motor vehicles and engines, as well as large direct emitters of GHGs. The requirements cover approximately 85% of the nation's GHG emissions, and apply to roughly 10,000 facilities. The first annual reports will be submitted to EPA in 2011 for the calendar year 2010, except for vehicle and engine manufacturers, which begin reporting for model year 2011. Some source categories included in the proposed rule are still under review. A "High Priority Performance Goal" under development for OAR is to make the reported data publically-available by June 15, 2011. The Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance is developing an implementation strategy for the reporting rule that will provide guidance to regions on compliance monitoring and assistance activities, and guidance on an appropriate enforcement response to support the integrity of the monitoring and reporting system. ' Final rule and related information available at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.html Final Guidance May?, 2010 46 of 63 ------- FY2011 Priorities Headquarters • Continue a comprehensive outreach and training effort with covered facilities, including the identification of facilities that are likely to meet the applicability thresholds. • Complete the development, testing, dissemination and training on the electronic reporting system. • Work with states on ways to leverage data reported to multiple jurisdictions for the development and implementation of programs • Carry out a comprehensive QA/QC and verification program on the data reported March 31,2011. • Provide support to the regions in identifying and listing reporting facilities, and in outreach to facilities that are priorities within specific regions. • Make the reported data publically-available by June 15, 2011 (High Priority Performance Goal). Regions Outreach, training, and facility identification • Identify and develop a list of facilities that may be required to report and, coordinating with HQ, develop a strategy to notify these facilities. Approximately 10,000 facilities meet the applicability requirements of the GHG reporting rule and will need to report emissions by March 31, 2011. • Participate in EPA-sponsored training sessions and present on the GHG reporting rule in other meetings, conferences, etc., in order to reach important targeted audiences (e.g., industry associations, multi-state meetings, GHG conferences). Since different industries may be prominent in specific regions (e.g., pulp and paper in Region 4), the regional emphases for training and outreach should reflect these differences. Electronic Reporting System • EPA will operate training sessions and a help desk for its electronic reporting tool. To supplement this effort, regions should develop expertise in the reporting tool so that they can respond to questions and assist reporters. This effort will be greatest during the second quarter of FY 2011. • Work with HQ in the verification process to follow up with specific facilities on questions raised during the early stages of review, and potentially with site visits later in the process. The reporting rule will use centralized EPA verification of reported data, taking advantage of electronic reporting and automated checks, in combination with direct follow up to a subset of facilities and occasional site visits. EPA will need to coordinate with certain states at various steps in the verification process in order to Final Guidance May?, 2010 47 of 63 ------- leverage all available information for specific facilities. Again, the regions should consider the prominent industries in their parts of the country in developing expertise for verification. PROPOSED PSD AND TITLE V GHG TAILORING RULE In September 2009, EPA proposed the Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, which specified new thresholds for GHG emissions to determine when CAA permits under the New Source Review and Title V operating permits programs would be required.10 The proposed thresholds would tailor these permit programs to limit which facilities would be required to obtain permits and would cover nearly 70% of the nation's largest stationary source GHG emitters—including power plants, refineries, and cement production facilities, while shielding small businesses and farms from permitting requirements. As noted in the State and Local Air Quality Management section of the Outdoor Air chapter, the Agency has requested additional grant resources to help state, local, and tribal agencies with appropriate permitting authority enhance their capacity to adequately assume responsibilities in this area. FY 2011 Priorities Headquarters • Develop sector- and source-specific guidance that will help permitting authorities and affected sources better understand program requirements for GHGs, GHG emissions for the selected source categories, methods for estimating those emissions, control strategies for GHG emissions, and available GHG measurement and monitoring techniques. Regions Work with HQ to assist states in evaluating and building the permitting capacity necessary to address affected sources of GHGs. VEHICLE GHG STANDARDS In September 2009, EPA and the Department of Transportation's National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) proposed a national program that would dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve fuel economy for new cars and trucks sold in the U.S.n The combined EPA and NHTSA standards that make up the proposed program would apply to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016. They require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon if 10 Fact sheet available at http://www.epa.gov/NSR/fs20090930action.html: proposed rule available at http://www.epa.gov/NSR/documents/GHGTailoringProposal.pdf 11 Proposed rule and related information available at http://epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm Final Guidance May?, 2010 48 of 63 ------- the automobile industry were to meet this carbon dioxide level solely through fuel economy improvements. Together, these proposed standards will cut carbon dioxide emissions by an estimated 950 million metric tons and 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program (model years 2012-2016). EPA expects to issue final standards for these vehicles in March 2010. Also, as required by the Supreme Court's decision, EPA is currently developing potential GHG standards for heavy-duty vehicles. EPA expects to propose a rule in 2010. In addition, EPA has received 10 rulemaking petitions to consider regulating GHG emissions from other categories of mobile sources. Many of those petitions were submitted two or more years ago. To respond to those petitions, EPA must investigate the possibility of proposing standards for those categories, as well as standards for model years after 2016. FY 2011 Priorities • Begin implementation of the standards for light-duty vehicles, covering model years 2012 through 2016 (High Priority Performance Goal). • Promulgate a final rule to control GHG emissions from heavy-duty engines. • Respond to rulemaking petitions and examine the need to regulate GHGs from additional categories of mobile sources. RENEWABLE FUEL STANDARD PROGRAM In February 2010, EPA finalized revisions to the National Renewable Fuel Standard program (commonly known as the RFS program).12 This rule makes changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard program as required by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). The revised requirements establish new specific annual volume standards for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel that must be used in transportation fuel. The revised requirements also include new definitions and criteria for both renewable fuels and the feedstocks used to produce them, including new GHG thresholds as determined by lifecycle analysis. The requirements for RFS will apply to domestic and foreign producers and importers of renewable fuel used in the U.S. FY2011 Priorities Headquarters • Begin implementing the new Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS2) and other actions required by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007, including outreach to stakeholders and a National Academy of Sciences review of the final lifecycle methodology. Develop a rule to address the impacts of renewable fuels on emissions (Anti-backsliding rule). • Continue to implement a real-time reporting system to ensure compliance with the RFS2 program. 12 Final rule and related information available at http://www.epa.gov/OMS/renewablefuels/ Final Guidance May?, 2010 49 of 63 ------- • Continue a multi-year testing program aimed at evaluating the environmental impacts of renewable fuels. • Continue our on-going conversations with states, local governments, and other groups on our ongoing analyses and rule developments related to the Renewable Fuel Standard. POTENTIAL NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS EPA has a number of pending legal obligations to consider action under CAA section 111 for several source categories of GHGs. EPA is assessing the potential development of GHG performance standards for new stationary sources and guidelines for state regulation of existing sources, of certain sizes and within certain industrial categories. These New Source Performance Standards could be an effective mechanism to reduce GHG emissions from major industrial sources. CLEAN AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY EPA manages the Clean Automotive Technology (CAT) and the Fuel Cell and Hydrogen programs, which develop advanced clean and fuel-efficient vehicle technology to better protect the environment and save energy. These programs are designed to help recognize and remove barriers in the marketplace and to more rapidly deploy cost-effective low GHG technologies into the transportation sector of the economy.13 FY2011 Priorities Headquarters • Continue the transfer of EPA's advances in hydraulic hybrid technologies (promote adoption of technology and technical assistance), providing continuity in EPA's commitments to the truck and fleet industry for development and deployment. In addition, the program will continue the transfer of EPA's advances in clean diesel combustion technologies, and promote the adoption of technology and technical assistance by providing continuity in EPA's commitments to the automotive and truck industry for development and deployment. • Continue field tests currently underway and planned for hydraulic-hybrid and clean engine technologies achieving better fuel economy than the typical baseline vehicles. • Continue demonstration of the effectiveness of the CAT Program's high-efficiency, low GHG, clean combustion E-85/M-85 alcohol engine in a series hydraulic hybrid vehicle. • Continue work on our hydraulic hybrid / clean engine demonstration partnership with the California South Coast Air Quality Management District. The work will demonstrate the low GHG potential possible from a shuttle bus equipped with series hydraulic hybrid ! (For more information see: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology Final Guidance May?, 2010 50 of 63 ------- technology and powered by the world's first gasoline homogeneous-charge, compression-ignition (HCCI) engine which gets diesel efficiency from gasoline fuel without the need for costly diesel aftertreatment. The partnership will also begin its initial work on ways to demonstrate the use of clean low GHG renewable fuel with hydraulic hybrid vehicles. VOLUNTARY CLIMATE PROTECTION PROGRAMS This program includes voluntary domestic and international programs, other than clean vehicle technology, that address GHG and climate change issues. Efforts are aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs and mitigating the effects of global climate change on the environment and human health while growing the economy. This program includes implementation of the new Memorandum of Understanding regarding the ENERGY STAR program with the Department of Energy (DOE) signed in September 2009. Under the agreement with DOE, EPA will manage the specification process for more than 60 product categories, the new and existing homes programs, and the commercial and industrial programs. This includes more frequent product specification revisions to ensure appropriate stringency. EPA's strategy is to: • Continue the successful ENERGY STAR partnerships in the residential and commercial buildings sector by adding new products to the ENERGY STAR family. • Raise awareness of the ENERGY STAR label for products, buildings, and homes, and promote superior energy management to public and private sector organizations of all sizes in all regions of the country. • Continue building on the success of voluntary programs in the industrial sector. This includes: o Enhancing the rate of energy and resource efficiency improvements through the ENERGY STAR and WasteWise programs. o Promoting the ENERGY STAR label for industrial plants and expanding opportunities to provide energy benchmarking tools to industry. o Cost-effectively keeping emissions of methane at 1990 levels or below through 2010. o Cost-effectively limiting emissions of the more potent greenhouse gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6), and facilitating the use of clean energy technologies and purchases of renewable energy. • Reduce international GHGs through the Methane to Markets Partnership by promoting and deploying cost-effective methane recovery technologies among other countries and the U.S. private sector. Final Guidance May?, 2010 51 of 63 ------- • Increase the use of renewable energy throughout the public and private sector by promoting membership in Climate Leaders and in the Green Power Partnership, particularly for larger organizations. • Promote energy efficiency and the generation of increased amounts of renewable energy through a variety of utility-focused programs. • Continue the SmartWay Transport Partnership to increase energy efficiency and lower greenhouse gas and other emissions from freight transportation. This includes: o Increasing the market penetration of advanced heavy-duty diesel tractor and trailer technologies. o Implementing innovative financing strategies, and developing a supply chain system to allow companies to select, measure, and certify the environmental performance of goods movement across multiple freight modes. o Enhancing existing SmartWay GHG measurement and tracking tools so they can be used to certify emission reductions from freight transport activities. o Implementing targeted GHG reduction efforts in specific freight transport sectors including ports, borders, and freight distribution hubs (including those located near disadvantaged communities). o Demonstrating SmartWay as an international role model through partnership programs and outreach efforts. • Help consumers and businesses more easily identify light and heavy duty vehicles that deliver superior fuel economy and emissions by identifying vehicles that meet the SmartWay criteria for superior environmental performance. • Work with financial experts to identify and develop tools, resources, and programs for states and regional authorities to implement innovative financing programs to deliver lower cost financing to diesel truck and nonroad equipment buyers (many of who are low-income and minority owner operations and businesses) for the purpose of upgrading the environmental performance of their diesel trucks or equipment. • Continue to develop, test, and demonstrate innovative fuel-efficient and clean vehicle and engine technologies, including: enhancing the SmartWay technology verification program to provide reliable information on a wider range of low carbon retrofit technologies; and ongoing work with auto and commercial vehicle industry partners to transfer EPA's engineering expertise and advanced technologies to commercial application. FY 2011 Priorities for Regions Promote GHG reduction programs and activities to stakeholders. This may include but is not limited to the following: • Participate in implementation of the Climate Showcase Communities grant program. Final Guidance May?, 2010 52 of 63 ------- Make commitments to procure ENERGY STAR-qualified products and encourage other organizations to do the same. Encourage tribal governments and communities to be partners in GHG activities and participate in and benefit from ongoing coordinated efforts and outreach programs. Rate the energy performance of buildings using EPA's national energy performance rating system, apply for the ENERGY STAR label for the qualifying buildings, and determine improvement plans for those that do not currently qualify; and encourage other organizations to do the same. Encourage organizations to join the ENERGY STAR Buildings Challenge and promote a 10% or more reduction in energy use in buildings, and assist local governments that have already joined to implement the Challenge. Ensure that new building designs are "Designed to Earn the ENERGY STAR" where applicable, and encourage others to do the same. Promote the use of the ENERGY STAR@Home, ENERGY STAR Yard Stick, and Home Energy Advisor web-tools to help homeowners make informed decisions about energy efficiency for their homes. Educate trucking companies and shippers about the SmartWay Partnership program and encourage them to join the program. Encourage major companies and organizations headquartered in the Region to join Climate Leaders and the Green Power Partnership. Promote the integration of integrate energy efficiency and clean energy into air quality plans (i.e., SIPs). Promote the recovery and use of methane as a clean energy source through EPA's methane partnership programs (e.g., landfills, agricultural waste, coal mines, and oil/gas operations). Operate pilot programs to use commercially-available advanced technology in fleets (such as state/municipal vehicles, school buses, or refuse vehicles) to produce cost- effective emissions and fuel consumption reductions. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 53 of 63 ------- Stratospheric Ozone As a signatory to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), the U.S. is obligated to regulate and enforce its terms domestically. In accordance with this international treaty and related Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements, EPA will continue to implement the domestic rulemaking agenda for the reduction and control of ozone-depleting substances (ODS), such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and methyl bromide, and enforce rules controlling their production, import, and emission. Implementation involves a combination of marketable allowances, requirements for servicing of ODS equipment, bans on non-essential products, and listing of alternatives to ozone-depleting substances that reduce overall risk to the environment and human health. We will strengthen outreach efforts to ensure efficient and effective compliance, and continue to identify and promote safer alternatives to curtail stratospheric ozone depletion and support climate protection goals. To help reduce international emissions, particularly in light of the more aggressive phasedown requirements adopted by Montreal Protocol signatories in September 2007, we will assist developing countries through the transfer of technology and U.S. expertise such as in the development and implementation of cap-and-trade licensing systems. Because the ozone layer is not expected to recover until the middle of this century at the earliest, the public will continue to be exposed to higher levels of UV radiation than existed prior to the use and emission of ODS. Recognizing this fact and the public's current sun-exposure practices, EPA will continue education and outreach efforts to encourage behavioral changes as the primary means of reducing UV-related health risks. DOMESTIC PROGRAMS EPA leads regulatory and voluntary programs to restore the ozone layer and reduce public health risk. For 2010, EPA's domestic strategy for stratospheric ozone protection will focus on: • Undertaking measures to ensure the successful transition of industries to non-ozone- depleting alternatives to class II substances (HCFCs), which beginning in 2010 are subject to further consumption, production, and use controls under the Montreal Protocol and CAA. • Limiting production of class I substances such as CFC-11, CFC-12, and methyl bromide to uses identified as critical or essential under the Montreal Protocol. • Listing new alternatives to ODS with less overall risk to human health and the environment. Final Guidance May?, 2010 54 of 63 ------- FY 2011 Milestones and Priorities • Administer the critical use exemption for production of methyl bromide as allowed under the Montreal Protocol. • Allocate production and consumption allowances for HCFCs to ensure U.S. compliance with caps under the Montreal Protocol. • Continue the combination of regulatory and voluntary activities to ensure safe handling, recovery, and disposal of ozone-depleting refrigerants, including implementation of the GreenChill and Responsible Appliance Disposal voluntary partnerships that build on the regulatory requirements established under CAA Title VI. • Expand the list of alternatives with overall better risk profiles under the Significant New Alternatives Program (SNAP) to foster the transition to safer alternatives. • Carry out enforcement actions related to programs under Title VI of the CAA including servicing of motor vehicle air conditioners, recovery and reuse of ODS during use and disposal, and avoid illegal imports of ODS. For additional information, see the National Program Guidance issued by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. MULTILATERAL FUND This program includes the Multilateral Fund, which promotes international compliance with the Montreal Protocol by financing the incremental cost of converting existing industries in developing countries to cost-effective, ozone-friendly technology. Our strategy is to continue to support the Ozone Secretariat's Multilateral Fund, which provides resources to developing nations to facilitate their transition to ozone-safe alternatives. In 2011 we will focus on: • Maximizing developing country reductions in ODS production by moving aggressively from a project-by-project approach to a national phase-out strategy approach. • Accelerating the shift to CFC alternatives by accelerating the closure of CFC manufacturers in developing countries. • Increasing support to developing country institutions to enable effective implementation of policy measures. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 55 of 63 ------- Indoor Environments EPA addresses indoor air quality issues by developing and implementing voluntary outreach and partnership programs that inform and educate the public about indoor air quality and actions that can reduce potential risks in homes, schools, and workplaces. EPA provides guidance on addressing environmental triggers of asthma, mold contamination and indoor air toxics, such as radon, environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), and particulate matter. EPA supports states, tribes, and communities in developing and implementing comprehensive multi-stakeholder indoor air toxics reduction efforts. EPA works with other federal agencies to provide guidance and assistance on how to reduce the exposure levels of these contaminants in all communities. Through the State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) Program, EPA helps states that have not yet established the basic elements of an effective radon assessment and mitigation program, and supports innovation and expansion in states that already have programs. Through these voluntary programs, EPA disseminates information and works with national, international, state, tribal, and local governments; industry and professional groups; and the public to promote actions to reduce exposures to potentially harmful levels of indoor air pollutants including radon, asthma triggers including ETS, and mold contamination in homes. EPA also transfers technology by providing detailed guidance on indoor air-related building design, operation, and maintenance practices to building owners, building managers, and school facility managers, and easy-to-use tools to educators and school facility managers. A key focus area is on the environmental management of asthma triggers in homes and schools. In 2011, EPA will ramp up efforts to provide healthy school environments by increasing outreach to community-based asthma programs, using existing guidance (IAQ Tools for Schools) and by expanding the Communities in Action for Asthma-Friendly Environments Campaign. Through greater implementation of the existing programs at HQ and expanded efforts in the regions, this initiative will deliver effective asthma management strategies to at-risk and underserved communities and schools across the nation by substantially expanding the current Communities in Action Network of 400 community-based programs and rapidly spreading best practice strategies to communities across the nation. Our strategies for improving indoor air quality and increasing the number of people breathing healthier indoor air are implemented through two priority areas: (1) indoor environmental pollutants and triggers which cause or exacerbate respiratory-related illnesses, and (2) radon. REDUCE RISKS FROM INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS AND ASTHMA TRIGGERS This program takes both a pollutant-focused and place-based approach to reduce risk at locations where people are exposed to indoor contaminants. As its top priorities, EPA and its partners design and implement voluntary guidance, education, outreach, training, and incentive programs and activities to: reduce exposure to environmental triggers of asthma (i.e., ETS, dust mites, pests, molds, nitrogen dioxide, and pet dander), help communities deliver effective Final Guidance May?, 2010 56 of 63 ------- comprehensive asthma care, and effectively manage indoor air quality in homes, schools and office buildings. Our strategy includes: implementing a national, multi-faceted asthma education and outreach program to improve and expand the delivery of comprehensive asthma care; an ETS program primarily focused on protecting young children from ETS exposure by collaborating with federal, state, and local organizations on promoting smoke-free homes and cars; and a national education and outreach program to inform the public, schools, school districts, educators, and building professionals about the importance of creating and maintaining healthy indoor environments in homes, schools, and workplaces. EPA has identified the reduction of asthma attacks as a National Environmental Justice Priority. Our strategy is targeted to improve the environmental health outcomes of people including segments of at-risk populations that are socio-economically disadvantaged or disproportionately impacted such as children and low- income individuals. (Supports Environmental Justice Draft Work Plan Goal 2 (see Appendix G).) Our program relies on several key implementation/educational tools: • National public awareness and media campaigns; • Community-based outreach and education, (e.g., educating caregivers of children on environmental triggers of asthma and exposure to ETS); • Sound, user-friendly guidance tailored to the program's varied constituencies; • Enhancement and application of programmatic support data; and • Knowledge and technology transfer (e.g. training health care providers on asthma trigger management strategies, building community capacity to deliver comprehensive asthma care). FY 2011 Priorities for the Regions • Support the expansion of the Communities in Action for Asthma Friendly Environments Campaign through increased support for at risk communities, bringing these communities into the Communities in Action Network, providing targeted training and outreach to underserved communities and schools; • Serve as the local, community-based point of contact to disseminate information and foster implementation of the indoor air programs; • Work with national partner affiliates, state, tribal, and local partners, and coalitions to reduce risks from indoor pollutants and asthma triggers; • Work with school districts and other school organizations to promote adoption of effective indoor air quality management programs in schools; • Manage grants to reduce risks from indoor pollutants and asthma triggers, particularly in homes, schools, and child care settings. RADON The voluntary radon program aims to significantly reduce the number of radon-induced lung cancer deaths in the U.S. The national goal is to approximately double number of lives saved through radon risk reduction within the next five years. The program's primary focus is on Final Guidance May?, 2010 57 of 63 ------- radon risk reduction in homes. EPA uses information dissemination, social marketing techniques, and partnerships with influential public health and environmental organizations to drive action, primarily thru the SIRG program, at the state, tribal, and local level. The two primary methods to achieve our risk reduction goals are: • Building healthier green homes with radon-resistant new construction; and • Reducing radon in existing homes. A third method is to reduce the risk to children and adults in schools: • Reducing radon in schools and building new schools with radon-reducing features. The principal mechanisms to achieve these results are: • Builders voluntarily building radon-resistant new homes; • State and local governments adopting building codes that include radon reduction; • Homeowners with high radon levels voluntarily fixing their homes; • Sellers/buyers fixing homes within real estate transactions; and • Schools reducing radon through "IAQ Tools for Schools" or other programs. State Indoor Radon Grants (SIRG) The SIRG Program distributes state assistance grant (STAG) funds under the authority of Section 306 of TSCA (Title III). Details on the SIRG Program can be found in EPA's State and Tribal Indoor Radon Grants Program Guidance and Handbook, located at: http://www.epa.gov/radon/pdfs/guidance_and_handbook.pdf. See also: http ://www. epa. gov/radon/sirgprogram.html. Recipients of FY 2011 SIRG funds should emphasize radon risk reduction by: (1) increasing testing and mitigation of existing homes by consumers, homeowners, non-profit partnerships, and real estate professionals; (2) builders voluntarily including radon-reducing features in new homes, including the use of green-building standards; (3) promoting the adoption or revision of state-local building codes for radon-reducing features; and, (4) promoting public education and awareness. Funded projects should clearly result in the following outcomes: • New homes built with radon-reducing features; • Testing and mitigation of existing homes; • Testing and mitigation of existing schools; • Building new schools with radon-reducing features; and • Other projects and activities that clearly contribute to achieving the preceding outcomes. EPA is considering a revision to the grant allotment methodology for the SIRG program. Any new methodology would likely begin to be implemented in FY 2012. EPA and SIRG recipients must continue working towards the bottom-line outcomes above. SIRG workplans should reflect radon program priorities and measurable results and outcomes. Final Guidance May?, 2010 58 of 63 ------- A preliminary FY 2011 regional allotment will be made available for review after release of the Final FY 2011 National Program Guidance. The HQ SIRG Program contact is Philip Jalbert (202-343-9431. jalbert.philip@epa.gov). FY 2011 Priorities for the Regions • Increase the number of homes and schools mitigated; and new homes built with radon- reducing features • Report on radon non-commitment indicators at the end of the year in ACS • Negotiate yearly workplans with states and tribes and track progress throughout the year through quarterly reports and frequent communication • Encourage the timely expenditure of grant funds (older funds first); • Participate in the national radon meeting; • Design and run regional stakeholder meetings that involve states and industry • Support the Radon Leaders Saving Lives campaign; and • Use Radon Action Month as a way to drive action throughout the year. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 59 of 63 ------- Radiation Protection EPA works with federal, state, tribal, and local agencies to prevent public exposure to harmful levels of radiation in the environment. The Agency assesses exposure risks, manages radioactive releases and exposures, ensures proper management of radioactive materials, and provides the public with information about radiation and its hazards. EPA also maintains a high level of preparedness to respond to radiological emergencies and potential acts of terrorism. EPA's strategies for radiation include: • Radiation Protection; • Radiation Emergency Response Preparedness; and • Homeland Security and Emergency Response and Recovery EPA continues to improve radioactive waste management through guidance, technical tools, assessment, and regulatory amendments as necessary and radiation-specific analytical and technical support. EPA also continues its commitment to Emergency Response/Homeland Security. EPA's Radiation Program continues to integrate radiation data into the Agency's information systems and make radiation information more accessible to the public. The program is enhancing the national environmental radiation monitoring system (RadNet) to better respond to radiation emergencies and prepare for potential terrorist threats and continues programs to provide guidance and tools to other federal agencies, as well as state, tribal, and local governments, our stakeholders, and partners. Using sound science, we continue efforts to create and enhance voluntary programs to better track radioactive materials, find alternatives to radiation sources in industry, and improve disposal options for radioactive sources in commerce. RADIATION PROTECTION This program includes activities for radiation clean up, federal guidance, risk modeling, Clean Materials, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), radiation air toxics, or National Emissions for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), technologically-enhanced naturally-occurring radioactive material (TENORM), radiation waste management, radioactive and mixed-waste operations, and laboratory analyses. Using a collaborative strategy, EPA works with the public, industry, states, tribes, and other governmental agencies to inform and educate people about radiation risks and promote actions that reduce human exposure. EPA also provides radiation guidance and tools and develops regulations as appropriate, to control radiation releases. Key programmatic activities include: • Promoting the safety of the U.S. and international metal supply by preventing future losses of radioactive materials including sealed sources; • Ensuring continued compliance with EPA regulations and EPA oversight for DOE waste disposal activities at the WIPP; Final Guidance May?, 2010 60 of 63 ------- Promoting the reduction and management of radiation risks in a consistent and safe manner at Superfund, DOE, DOD, state, local, tribal, and other federal sites; Maintaining appropriate methods to manage radioactive releases and exposures including evaluating remediation technologies for radioactively contaminated sites; Assessing exposure risks and providing information about radiation and its hazards; Evaluating the human health and environmental risks from radiation exposure and mitigating impacts to the public; Providing national-level guidance on the risks posed by radioactive materials in the environment; Enhancing voluntary programs to track radioactive materials more effectively, find alternatives to radiation sources in industry, and improve disposal options for radioactive sources in commerce; Providing a national monitoring program for environmental radioactivity; Improving EPA, state, and commercial radioanalytical capacity and capabilities: o Providing analytical capability to evaluate radioactive and mixed waste concentrations in all environmental media; o Providing improved methods and practices for sampling and assessing radioactive material in the environment; and o Providing reference laboratory support to review new methods and confirm other laboratory analyses. FY 2011 Priorities Additional quantities of radioactive waste certified by EPA as properly disposed will be deposited at the WIPP in 2011; EPA radiation laboratories will improve analytical capacity through updated technology and methods; EPA will improve state radiation laboratory capabilities and capacity through training and evaluation; EPA will respond to issues related to the resurgence of nuclear power, including the development of new nuclear power plants; EPA will respond to increased uranium extraction and processing, including Regional review of extraction facility Environmental Impact Statements and permits; EPA will publish a proposed regulation implementing the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act at 40 CFR 192; EPA will determine if its review of 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart W will result in a revised regulation; a positive determination will result in a proposed regulation; Laboratories will support Regional remediation projects; Regions will continue to serve as the local, community-based point of contact to disseminate information on EPA's radiation protection program; Regions will continue to coordinate regional radiation issues among Regional Offices; Regions will continue to implement regulatory programs (e.g., radiological NESHAPs); Regions will continue as requested, to provide technical support to state radiation, solid waste, environmental and health programs and headquarters radiation regulatory, policy and technical workgroups; Final Guidance May?, 2010 61 of 63 ------- • Regions will continue to provide technical support to Superfund; • Regions will continue to work with states on issues involving TENORM that include issues associated with mining legacy waste disposal and water treatment residuals. RADIATION EMERGENCY RESPONSE PREPAREDNESS This program includes federal preparedness activities, ORIA programmatic readiness, Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) personnel and equipment readiness, development and participation in exercises, training and outreach, radiological emergency response guidance, extensive laboratory capability for radioactive and mixed waste analyses, and RadNet, EPA's national environmental radiation monitoring system. Using a collaborative strategy, EPA works with tribes, federal, state and local agencies to ensure that the appropriate parties are fully informed and prepared to respond should an incident involving radiation occur. EPA's key activities supporting radiation response preparedness include: • Preparing to respond to incidents involving radioactive materials through training, infrastructure development, regular exercises, and field experience; • Issuing Protective Action Guides; • Coordinating with other organizations to ensure thorough response and preparedness planning; • Providing radioanalytical laboratory capabilities to assess radioactive contamination during all phases of an incident; • Providing national, near-real time data on airborne radioactive material concentrations; • Supporting nationwide development of increased laboratory capacity and capability; and • Providing waste disposal options for wastes resulting from a radioactive dispersal device (ROD). FY 2011 Priorities • EPA's Radiological Emergency Response Team (RERT) will maintain its high level of team readiness; • Laboratories will support urgent regional removal operations; • RERT staff will support regions with training and at exercises; • Regions will continue to serve as the local, community-based point of contact to disseminate information on EPA's radiation response and preparedness program, activities, and capabilities. As appropriate, regions should: o Provide technical support to state radiation control programs; o Support EPA's radiation emergency response operations, including the assignment of personnel to serve as Regional Radiation Advisor and RERT Liaison; o Participate in radiological response exercises; and o Support radiological response training to increase the capacity of the Agency's Response Support Corps. Final Guidance May?, 2010 62 of 63 ------- HOMELAND SECURITY: PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND RECOVERY EPA will continue coordinating homeland security activities across the Agency, with the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies to ensure consistency with the National Response Framework. EPA's strategy for Homeland Security Preparedness, Response, and Recovery builds upon the efforts discussed under Radiation Response Preparedness. In addition to overall coordination activities, EPA has significantly upgraded its environmental monitoring network for radiation (RadNet) by expanding its ambient radiation monitoring capabilities. RadNet provides EPA data on ambient levels of radiation in the environment, with data for radiological emergency response assessments, and data for public officials and the general public. Reference laboratories serve as an authoritative source in the Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN) for method development, verification, and validation. EPA's National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) will continue to serve as the Agency's radiological reference laboratory. The Agency will also continue to upgrade its radiological laboratory response capability which will include a network of "go-to" public and private sector laboratories to ensure a minimal level of surge capacity for radiological terrorism incidents. FY2011 Priorities • Regions will continue to provide leadership in coordinating inquiries from RadNet monitor site personnel and station operators and serve as the local, community-based point of contact to disseminate information on EPA's national radiation monitoring system. • The Agency will continue its pilot project to improve state radiological laboratory capacity through provision of additional laboratory instruments, training, proficiency testing and audits of the selected state laboratories. ++ End ++ Final Guidance May?, 2010 63 of 63 ------- Appendix A Appendix A - Performance Measures Office of Air & Radiation Note: Bracketed text in the table below is explanatory text that is included in this appendix to provide clarifying information about the performance measure. Within the Annual Commitment System database, this text appears in the Explanation/Comment field. ACS Code OAQPS N001 OAQPS N002 OAQPS N003 OAQPS N004 OAQPS N005 OAQPS N07 OAQPS N08 OAQPS N09 OAQPS N10 OAQPS Nil OAQPS N29 Measure Text Percentage reduction in population- weighted ambient concentration of ozone in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline. [HQ reports this measure.] Percentage reduction in population-weighted ambient concentration of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in all monitored counties from 2003 baseline. [HQ reports this measure.] Cumulative percentage reduction in the number of days with Air Quality Index (AQI) values over 100 since 2003, weighted by population and AQI value. [HQ reports this measure.] Cumulative percentage reduction in the average number of days during the ozone season that the ozone standard is exceeded in baseline nonattainment areas, weighted by population. [HQ reports this measure.] Percentage improvement in the number of days to process State Implementation Plan revisions weighted by complexity. [HQ reports this measure.] Number of final rulemaking actions on PM2.5 SIPs (due April 2008) consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. Number of final rulemaking actions taken on regional haze SIPs consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for CO, SO2, PM10, and lead areas, consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for 8-hour ozone, consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. Number of final rulemaking actions taken on redesignation requests for PM2. 5, consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. Number of completed voluntary reclassifications for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas. Non- Cmmit Ind Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No State Grant Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No National Target 10% 5% 29% 23% -2.40% 58 actions (39 areas) 53 states & territories Sum of Bids Sum of Bids Sum of Bids Sum of Bids Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 1 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code OAQPS N30 OAQPS N31 OAQPS N32 OAQPS N33 OAQPS M06 OAQPS MOV OAQPS M08 OAQPS M09 OAQPS M10 OAQPS Mil OAQPS M12 OAQPS M18 Measure Text Percentage of newly violating areas/counties that region is targeting for developing appropriate actions to bring designated attainment areas into compliance with the NAAQS. Number of states or local agencies developing and/or commencing implementation of innovative and voluntary emission reduction projects. Number of completed attainment determination actions for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas, including mandatory reclassifications, clean air data requests, and one-year extension requests. Number of final rulemaking actions taken on SIPs for 0.08 ppm 8-hour ozone for moderate areas that were formerly subpart 1 or subpart 2 marginal areas reclassified to moderate. Percentage of state and local monitoring agency certification requests region evaluates and forwards to HQ when deemed adequate. [Note: CY 2010 annual data certifications are due May 1, 201 1 .] Percentage of required Technical Systems Audits conducted to achieve an audit of each organization within a 3-year period. Percentage of state and local annual monitoring plans reviewed and approved within 120 days when network changes are proposed. Percentage of 2nd and later Approved Regional Method (ARM) requests acted on by the region in accordance with HQ guidance. Percentage of affected entities that operate monitors in accordance with Part 58, grant terms, and QAPP. Percentage of affected entities who submit data to AQS in accordance with Part 58. Percentage of AQS quarterly data reviews completed and resolved for timeliness and completeness. Percentage of NATTS Technical Systems Audits the region participates in over a 3-year period. Non- Cmmit Ind No Yes No No No No No No No No No No State Grant No No No No No No No No No Yes No No National Target 100% No Target Sum of Bids Sum of Bids 100% All regions meet once in 3-year goal 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% All regions meet 50% goal Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 2 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code OAQPS M19 OAQPS M20 OAQPS M22 OAQPS P001 OAQPS P06 OAQPS P09 OAQPS Pll OAQPS P12 OAQPS P13 OAQPS P14 OAQPS P19 OAQPS P20 NEW Measure Text Percentage of community-scale air toxics ambient monitoring programs for which region will review QA requirements and ensure measurement consistency with NATTS when appropriate. Percentage of affected entities that operate NATTS in accordance with national guidance and QAPPs. Percentage of 201 1 Annual Monitoring Plans reviewed for required new and/or modification to existing population- and source-oriented lead monitoring sites. Percentage of major NSR permits issued within one year of receiving a complete permit application. [HQ reports this measure] Percentage of Title V program evaluations conducted and reports completed within the fiscal year. Percentage of state/local major NSR/PSD permits reviewed by region for new and modified sources to ensure consistent implementation of the NSR program. Percentage of permitting authorities reporting complete Part 70 TOPs data. Percentage of Part 71 significant modifications issued by region within 18 months of receiving a complete permit application. Percentage of Part 71 initial permits issued by region within 18 months of receiving a complete permit application. Part 71 renewals: Percentage reduction of total Part 71 extended permits. Percentage of PSD permits issued by region within one year of receiving a complete permit application. Percentage of Part 70 initial permits reviewed by region. Non- Cmmit Ind No No No No No No No No No No No No State Grant No Yes No Yes No No No No No No No No National Target 100% 100% 100% 78% 1 program per region 75% 100% 100% 94% 10% 80% 75% Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 3 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code OAQPS P21 NEW OAQPS T001 OAQPS T002 OAQPS T05 OAQPS T06 OAQPS TR01 OAQPS TR02 OAQPS TR03 OAQPS TR04 OAQPS TR06 OAQPS TR08 OTAQ Ola Measure Text Percentage of Part 70 permit renewals reviewed by region. Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity -weighted (for cancer risk) emissions of air toxics, compared to 1993 baseline. [HQ reports this measure] Cumulative percentage reduction in tons of toxicity -weighted (for noncancer risk) emissions of air toxics, compared to 1993 baseline. [HQ reports this measure] Number of communities (e.g. CARE communities/projects) the region is working with to assess and address sources of air toxics, including the use of voluntary air toxic reduction programs in their communities. Percentage of requests from states, local agencies, and tribes for delegation of section 112 standards processed within 180 days of receipt. Cumulative number of tribes with approved eligibility determinations under the Tribal Authority Rule. Cumulative number of tribes with delegation of federal programs to address air quality conditions on tribal lands. Cumulative number of tribes with approved TIPs to address air quality conditions on tribal lands. Number of tribes conducting air quality monitoring activities. Number of tribes implementing voluntary or other non-regulatory programs. Number of reservations that completed or updated an emission inventory during FY201 1 . Number of projects implemented that promote diesel emissions reductions. [The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative number of projects since the beginning of the Fiscal Year in the Current Value field. In the Explanation field report the numbers and categories of projects in accordance with the Diesel Work Group's instructions and definitions for reporting. Also in the Explanation field, report whether the data has been entered into National Clean Diesel Database.] Non- Cmmit Ind No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State Grant No Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No National Target 25% 36% 59% No Target 100% 11 3 6 No Target No Target No Target No Target Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 4 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code OTAQ Olb OTAQ Olcl OTAQ Olc2 OTAQ Olc3 OTAQ Olc4 OTAQ Olc5 OTAQ Olc6 OTAQ Olc7 OTAQ Olc8 OTAQ Olc9 OTAQ OlclO Measure Text Number of existing heavy duty diesel engines (including school bus engines) that have been retrofitted, replaced, or retired. [The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative number of engines since the beginning of the Fiscal Year in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report whether that data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Annual tons of NOx emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of NOx since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Annual tons of PM emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of PM since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Annual tons of HC emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of HC since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value field. Use the "Explanation" field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Annual tons of CO emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of CO since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Annual tons of CO2 emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects. The baseline is reset to zero at the beginning of each fiscal year. At the end of each quarter, report the cumulative reductions of CO2 since the beginning of the fiscal year in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Lifetime tons of NOx emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects] Lifetime tons of PM emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects] Lifetime tons of HC emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects] Lifetime tons of CO emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects] Lifetime tons of CO2 emissions avoided. [Include NCDC and SmartWay projects] Non- Cmmit Ind Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State Grant No No No No No No No No No No No National Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target No Target Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 5 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code OTAQ 02a OTAQ 02b OTAQ 03a OTAQ 03b OTAQ 04 OTAQ 06 OTAQ 08 SIRG1 SIRG2 SIRG3 ORIA IAQ3 Measure Text Percentage of timely adequacy /inadequacy determinations made by the region for identified mobile source budgets included in control strategy SIPs or maintenance plans for transportation-related criteria pollutants (e.g., ozone, CO, PM2.5, PM10) submitted by states. [Report % in the Current Value field. Use Explanation field to report the actual number of determinations made, for what SIPs, and which pollutants.] Percentage of approval/disapproval rulemaking actions taken on mobile budgets included in control strategy SIPs or maintenance plans for transportation-related criteria pollutants (e.g., ozone, CO, PM2.5, PM10) at the time of final rulemaking on such SIPs. [Report % in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to report the actual number of approval/disapproval rulemaking actions taken for what SIPs and which pollutants.] Percentage of transportation conformity determinations submitted by US DOT or an MPO that the region reviewed and commented on for 8-hour ozone, PM2.5, PM10, and CO nonattainment and maintenance areas. [Report % in the Current Value field. Use the Explanation field to list the conformity determinations reviewed, where, and for which pollutants.] Number of final rulemaking actions taken by the region on Transportation Conformity -related SIP revisions consistent with the annual SIP processing goal. [Report number in the Current Value field and use the Explanation field to provide the actual total number of submitted SIPs where the due date for final rulemaking falls in FY1 1 . Also explain if bidding fewer than the universe, and if reporting Status as "not on target" or "measure not met."] Number of outreach activities conducted by the region to support SmartWay programs. [Bid the number of events region believes it will do in F Yl 1 . Report the number of events in the Current Value. In the Explanation field list the outreach events including names and dates of events.] Percentage of I/M reports submitted by states for existing I/M programs (including OBD) reviewed by the region. [Report % in the Current Value field. In the Explanation field provide the actual number of I/M reports that were submitted and reviewed, and from which states.] Number of CMAQ-funded clean diesel projects implemented by state and local governments. [Report the actual number of projects in the Current Value field. In the Explanation field indicate whether the data has been entered into the National Clean Diesel Database.] Number of additional homes with operating mitigation systems. Number of additional homes built with radon-resistant new construction. Number of additional schools mitigated and/or built with radon-resistant new construction. Number of schools newly using organized indoor air quality management practices consistent with EPA TFS. [This is a non-commitment indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid aggregate number of schools newly using organized indoor air quality management practices consistent with EPA TFS. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, students reached, and anecdotal information about health outcomes and/or student performance.] Non- Cmmit Ind No No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes State Grant No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No National Target 100% 100% 100% Sum of Bids 100 100% No Target No Target No Target No Target 1,100 Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 6 of 7 ------- Appendix A ACS Code ORIA IAQ5 ORIA IAQ6 ORIA IAQ7 NEW ORIA RAD1 ORIA RAD 2 OAP1 OAP7 NEW OAP8 NEW Measure Text Aggregate number of people with asthma and/or their caregivers educated about environmental management of asthma and childhood exposure to ETS. [This is a non-commitment indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid number of people educated. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal information about health outcomes.] Aggregate number of health care professionals trained about environmental management of asthma and childhood exposure to ETS. [This is a non-commitment indicator with regional bidding and reporting. Initial bid values are set at zero. Bid number of people educated. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal information about health outcomes.] Total number of programs enrolled in www.AsthmaCommunitvNetwork.org. [Reporting reflects the total current regional programs in Communities in Action for Asthma Friendly Environments) network found at ( www.AsthmaCommunitvNetwork.org ) at the EOY. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe highlights, innovations, and anecdotal information about health and other outcomes.] Number of radiation exercises the region participates in. [Bid projected number of exercises. Report numbers in Current Value field and use Explanation field to describe the name, location and type of each exercise as well as the number of regional radiation program participants.] Number of individuals identified and trained to fill RERT liaison and radiation advisor positions. [Bid projected total number of personnel identified and fully qualified for the RERT liaison and radiation advisor positions. Each Region should have 1 RERT liaison and 1 radiation advisor position. Report numbers in Current Value field.] Percentage increase in total square footage benchmarked compared to the total square footage benchmarked in CY 2010. [This data is provided by HQ and has an expected lag of two months after the end of the quarter. Therefore, reporting will usually lag one quarter.] Number of people reached (impressions) during regional outreach/education activities in promoting ENERGY STAR. [These activities would include presentations, publications, interviews, and webinars. When reporting results, in the Explanation field, break impressions into categories of Residential, Commercial, Products, or Programmatic Overview.] Number of ENERGY STAR technical support activities. [Technical support includes, but is not limited to, planning meetings, award ceremonies, direct assistance to the public, expertise requests, and meetings to develop future relationships with stakeholders. When reporting results, in the Explanation field, break these points of contact into categories of Residential, Commercial, Products, or All.] Non- Cmmit Ind Yes Yes Yes No No No No No State Grant No No No No No No No No National Target No Target 2,000 No Target No Target 20 15% 5,000 240 End Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Final Appendix A - Page 7 of 7 ------- Appendix B Appendix B - EFFECTIVE USE and DISTRIBUTION of STAG FUNDS Effective Grants Management and Results Key administrative and programmatic provisions that help govern the effective oversight and utilization of continuing program and project-specific grants awarded to state, local, tribal and multi-jurisdictional entities are summarized in this section of the appendix. The list is not exhaustive but included are: proper use of authorities for award of assistance, adherence to specific grant program requirements, effective post-award oversight, identification of performance measures and results, the funding of co-regulator organizations, and the promotion of competition. Links are provided to Agency internet and intranet sites where additional information, including the full text of current guidance, is available. Using Proper Authorities for Award In FY 2009, OAR issued updated guidance for use by Program and Regional Offices to help clarify who is eligible for grant assistance given the purpose, appropriation and grant authority associated with the funds available. OAR will update the guidance, as needed, to reflect changes associated with its annual appropriation. The current guidance may be accessed at: http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/state/Guid_Office_of_OAR.pdf The program contact is Courtney Hyde at 202-564-1227. Administrative Guidance for OAR Grant Programs In FY 2009 OAR issued a reference document consolidating the various statutory, regulatory and policy provisions that govern administration of the CAA §105 continuing air grant program for state, local and some Tribal agencies. The guidance is intended as a resource for HQ and regional staff. The guidance can be accessed at: http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/state/Consolidated GuidAdmS 105 Air Grant Program.pdf. The program contact, William Houck, can be reached at 202-564-1349. For the Tribal air program, additional guidance and links to Tribal air program information may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/tribal/pdfs/menuofoptions.pdf The program contact, Barrel Harmon, may be reached at: 202-564-7416. The program contact for Diesel Emissions Reduction Assistance (DERA) grants is Jennifer Keller who can be contacted at 202-343-9121. Additional information and links to guidance on the State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) program may be found in the State and Local Air Quality Management section of this guidance. The program contact is Phil Jalbert at 202-343-9431. Ensuring Effective Oversight of Assistance Agreements Updated EPA Order 5700.2A2 streamlines the post-award management of grants and cooperative agreements. It became effective January 1, 2008. The Order requires EPA offices to monitor a recipient's compliance with its programmatic terms and conditions, the correlation of the work plan and application content with actual grant progress, the use of equipment, and compliance with relevant statutory and regulatory requirements. Offices are required to submit oversight plans and document their execution. The Order may be found at: http://intranet.epa.gOv/ogd/policy/4.0-PostAward-Topics.htm. Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-1 of 6 ------- Appendix B Improving Workplans and Measurement of Performance for Grants The Agency commitment to improve grant oversight and results is also reflected in its efforts to promote accountability and transparency in its categorical grant programs through relevant measures of performance, clear workplans and consistent reporting. In FY 2007, the Agency began an effort to highlight results in its categorical programs by focusing on a select set of performance measures drawn from the overall set of commitments and measures contained its annual commitment system (ACS). For FY 2011, while the administrative approach for displaying this information has changed (a separate template is no longer required), the obligation to report on the applicable measures and their results has not. Reporting on measures where results can be articulated at the Regional level remains the responsibility of the Regions and grant recipients. Appendix A of this guidance contains the overall set of performance measures applicable for FY 2011 including those that pertain to the categorical grant programs. EPA and ECOS continue to discuss whether there is utility in identifying a set of common measures that reflect the primary functional work areas under each of the 14 Agency categorical grant programs. Key concerns are what information should be captured and how it could be effectively used. For information on the joint effort with ECOS, contact Margo Padgett in OCFO at 202-564-1211. How activities and measures are displayed is the key to transparency in grant workplans. States, locals and Tribes seeking single media air and radon categorical grants and States and Tribes seeking Performance Partnership grants containing air or radon elements should continue to submit grant work plans that enable EPA to identify clear linkages between the recipient's efforts and the Agency's Strategic Plan. The Agency's long-term goal is for EPA and the States to achieve greater consistency in workplan formats. To further promote workplan consistency and transparency, the Office of Grants and Debarment (OGD), in concert with the national program offices, has convened a State/EPA workgroup of grant practitioners to develop a menu of workplan formats for EPA and state and local agencies to use when negotiating workplans for the 14 identified categorical programs. This includes §105 Continuing Air Program and the State Indoor Radon Grant programs. In developing these formats, the workgroup would build upon the results of the FY 2009 State Grant Workplan pilots.l The formats would be available for use beginning with the FY 2011 grants cycle. In consultation with the practitioner's workgroup, and recognizing that the formats will need to be phased in over time, OGD would develop performance metrics to ensure that 100% of workplans under the 14 categorical grant programs use one of the approved formats by no later than the FY 2013 grants cycle. If a particular agency were to encounter difficulties under its laws in adopting one of the established formats, OGD would work with the affected Region and NPM to resolve the issue. OGD also proposes, in concert with ECOS, to evaluate the workplan initiative and determine whether it would sufficiently enhance transparency and accountability such that developing the common set of measures noted earlier would be unnecessary. Please contact Howard Corcoran, OARM/OGD, at 202-564-1903 with any questions or comments. 1 See "Guidance for FY '09 State Workplan Pilots;" S. Hazen to DAAs and DRAs; May 16, 2008. Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-2 of 6 ------- Appendix B In addition to clear measures and workplans, regular and consistent performance reporting should enable the meaningful comparison of a categorical program recipient's past and planned activities and performance. OAR and the Regional Offices are also working with recipients and the rest of the Agency in a continuing process to assess, reduce, refine or affirm existing reporting requirements. OAR is always receptive to comment from state, local and tribal agencies on ways to reduce reporting burdens as well as ways to improve performance reporting and performance measures. This includes discussion of improved short-term environmental indicators and performance measures and their incorporation in annual and multi- year assistance agreements. Achieving Programmatic and Environmental Results Sound measures of performance should yield insightful and useful results data. EPA Order 5700.7 applies to all Agency grants not just categorical grants to States and covers all phases of the grants process from development of a solicitation to evaluation of results. The Order requires EPA project officers to assure that each grant: (a) can be linked to the Agency's strategic architecture, (b) articulates measurable outputs and outcomes, and (c) reports the programmatic and, where possible, environmental results achieved. For more information see: http://intranet.epa.gOv/ogd/policy/order/5700.7.pdf and http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/npmguidance/oar/2007/oar_2007_environ_results.pdf. Approval Process for STAG Awards to Co-Regulator Organizations A co-regulator organization is defined by EPA as a national or regional (i.e., multi- jurisdictional) organization that represents the interests of co-regulators/co-implementors (state, tribal or local governments) in the execution of national or regional environmental programs.2 EPA issued a policy on December 1, 2006 that clarified that the head of the affected State agency or department (e.g., the State environmental commissioner or head of the State public health or agricultural agency) be involved in the funding process and that EPA request and obtain the prior consent of this official before taking funds off the top of a state grant allotment for direct award to a state/local co-regulator organization. The Agency's policy on STAG funds in awards to co- regulator/co-implementor organizations may be found at: http://intranet.epa.gov/ogd/competition/piexemptions/approval_process for STAG awards.htm. It is also important to note that the award of funds to such an organization is still subject to a determination as to whether it can be exempted from competition. Effective October 1, 2007, the Agency's Competition Policy found that co-regulator status alone for a multi- juridictional, co-implementor organization did not warrant an exception from competition. Other exceptions, including the 'public interest' exception, remain available for consideration. The Competition Policy may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ogd/competition/5700 5Al.pdf. The definition of co-regulator or co-implementor may be found in the Agency's Order (5700.5A1) - Revised Competition Policy, http://intranet.epa. gov/ogd/policv/order/5700_5 .pdf. In various regions of the country state and local agencies have formed multi-jurisdictional organizations (MJO) to help coordinate their geographically-specific air quality interests. These agencies have directed their Regional Offices to target portion of their grant allotment to their MJO. For OAR, the only co- regulator grant awarded at the national level with STAG resources has been to the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (formerly STAPPA-ALAPCO). See the State and Local Air Quality Management section for more details. Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-3 of 6 ------- Appendix B Promotion of Competition Agency policy is to promote competition in the award of grants and cooperative agreements where practical. EPA Order 5700.5Al presents the Agency's competition policy. The Order exempts grants for continuing environmental programs, such as those funded under §105 as well as §103 grants for fine particulate monitoring, §103 national air toxics monitoring trends network grants, federally-recognized tribes and inter-tribal consortia under OAR's tribal grant program; and TSCA §306 grants for state indoor radon programs. Radon grants to tribes and intertribal consortia under TSCA §10 grants must be competed. EPA is not precluded from awarding grants through competition for a portion of the exempted programs if the Agency determines it is in the best interest of the public to do so. Contact Courtney Hyde at 202-564- 1227 for more information on competition of grants. Efficient Exchange of Environmental Information As earlier noted in the Cross-Cutting Priorities section of the Executive Summary portion of the main document - states, tribes and territories exchanging both regulatory and non- regulatory environmental data with one another, or with EPA, should make the Exchange Network and EPA's connection to it, the Central Data Exchange (CDX), where available, the standard way to exchange data. Other legacy methods should be phased out. More information can be obtained at: http://www.exchangenetwork.net/index.htm. Preliminary Allocation for State/Local Continuing Air Program Grants A preliminary allocation of state and local continuing air program grants has been included. It should assist Regions in their initial negotiations of FY 2011 grant workplans with their state and local air agencies. It is important to note, however, that a final allocation is still subject to (a) appropriation of funds and direction by Congress, and (b) further consultation with both EPA Program and Regional Offices, as well as with the affected state, local, and tribal agencies. Responsibilities and funds for multi-jurisdictional organizations must also still be addressed. EPA has not yet completed its preliminary allocations of: (a) the $15 million in STAG funds requested for monitoring equipment purchases (and related site preparation) in support of the revised NAAQS; and (b) the $25 million STAG request for program capacity building for GHG permitting. These allocations will also be the subject of additional consultation with our partners and are anticipated to be available within the next several months. Final allocations for State Indoor Radon Grants and Tribal Air grants are also not included.. The distribution of funds for these programs is subject to further consultation with co- implementors and other stakeholders and is also subject to Congressional appropriation. Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-4 of 6 ------- Appendix B DRAFT Table B-l PRELIMINARY Allocation of FY 2011 State/Local Continuing Air Program Grants (in $s)* (GHG and Expanded NAAQS Monitoring $s are not included) Direct Award to Regions (Includes Associated Program Support for Specific Recipients) Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Subtotal NAAQS/SIPs 6,558,063 7,427,770 8,809,979 11,658,233 13,002,615 7,748,782 3,049,607 4,383,754 15,005,798 4,119,588 81,774,189 Monitoring 5,695,160 6,450,431 7,650,771 10,124,255 11,291,745 6,729,205 2,648,343 3,815,628 13,031,351 3,577,537 71,014,427 Air Toxics 2,588,709 2,932,014 3,477,623 4,601,934 5,132,611 3,058,730 1,203,792 1,734,377 5,923,341 1,626,153 32,279,285 Compl. /Oversight 2,416,129 2,736,547 3,245,782 4,295,138 4,790,437 2,854,814 1,123,540 1,618,751 5,528,452 1,517,743 30,127,333 Total 17,258,061 19,546,762 23,184,156 30,679,559 34,217,408 20,391,531 8,025,282 11,562,510 39,488,943 10,841,020 215,195,233 Associated Program Support at the National Level CAA Training IMPROVE 1,228,000 1,995,000 1,228,000 Targeted Monitoring PM2.5 Air Monitoring (103/105)** NATTS Local Air Toxics Monitoring 41,875,000 4,995,000 41,875,000 4,995,000 3,153,000 Interstate Transport Commissions N.E. O3 Transport Commission 638,767 Total 269,080,000 * Includes associated program support (see Table B-2), Great Lakes in RO5, US-Mexico Border in ROs 6&9, PAMS & PAMS assessment; Pb monitoring & Pb PEP support. ** Includes PM2.5 PEP support. Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-5 of 6 ------- Appendix B DRAFT Table B-2 Associated Program Support for Specific Recipients by Region (in $s) (Funds to be Reserved from Direct Award Amounts in Table B-l) (PRELIMINARY Amounts) Activity NOx Trading NACAA NPAP Nat'l Procure Contract Lead Monitoring PEP PAMS Asssmnts PAMS Equipmt Upgrd 1 101,080 85,267 3,400 42133 2 359,765 192,365 6,110 197,079 3 347,795 178,149 72,200 36,310 4 665,665 332,712 63,700 145,674 5 609,856 282,226 129,800 197,443 6 103,740 83,700 47,100 25,582 7 125,685 72,477 19,520 43,671 8 35.654 30,800 145,997 9 291,773 57,500 107,352 10 67,434 23,950 7,383 Total 2,313,586 1,621,777 454,080 948,624 TBD TBD TBD Final Guidance May 11, 2010 Appendix B-6 of 6 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Appendix C. AMBIENT AIR MONITORING EPA and its partners at state, local, and tribal agencies, manage and operate ambient air monitoring networks across the country with three primary objectives: to ensure the public has access to clean air by comparing data and implementation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and other health indicators for toxics, to provide the public with reports and forecasts of the Air Quality Index, and to provide information to health and atmospheric scientists to better inform future reviews of the NAAQS. EPA works with state, local, and tribal air monitoring agencies to continuously improve the ambient air monitoring networks for current and future needs. This work includes milestones that have resulted from planning the ambient air monitoring network through a stakeholder driven process known as the Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy1 (monitoring strategy) as well as through NAAQS reviews that include both public and scientific input. While recent NAAQS reviews are resulting in changes to the monitoring networks, the overall goals and themes of the monitoring strategy remain the same. The major purpose of the monitoring strategy is to optimize the networks to be more responsive to current and future needs (e.g., assess air quality trends, better characterize the multi-pollutant nature of air pollution, provide for more timely NAAQS Related Monitoring Highlights Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NAAQS strengthened with addition of one-hour standard to protect against short-term exposures; monitors will be necessary in locations to measure peak concentrations that occur over shorter periods of time; these locations will typically be near major roads in urban areas. Revised network must be in place by January 1, 2013. Area- wide component of network will be retained. Lead (Pb) NAAQS monitoring proposal to require monitoring near lead sources with emissions of 0.5 to 1.0 tons per year. Also, proposing non-source lead monitors at NCore stations. If finalized, monitors would need to be in place by one-year after final rule is effective (projected deadline approximately summer 2011). Ozone (O 3) NAAQS reconsideration. EPA is reconsidering the level of the ozone NAAQS that was finalized in Spring of 2008 as the NAAQS is not as protective as recommended by EPA's panel of science advisors, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. Ozone (O 3) Monitoring Requirements - Separate from the NAAQS reconsideration, EPA has proposed changes to the ozone monitoring requirements that would add monitors in smaller urban areas not already required to monitor, non- urban areas to characterize ozone in sensitive ecosystems and provide coverage in less populated areas, and lengthening the ozone monitoring season. If finalized, new monitors would need to be operating by the first day of the ozone season in 2012; monitoring season changes would take effect on the first day of ozone monitoring in 2011. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) NAAQS is proposed for strengthening by replacing the existing primary SO2 NAAQS with a one- hour standard. Monitoring requirements for SO2 are also proposed to be revised. Monitoring would be required in Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA's) based on population size and SO2 emissions. Additional monitoring would also be required based on the States contribution to national SO2 emissions, which could be placed either within or outside a CBSA's. All new SO2 monitoring would be required to be operational by January 1, 2013. Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS: Changes must be proposed by October 28, 2010 and finalized by May 13, 2011. The CASAC CO Review Panel has noted concerns with the adequacy of the current network and the sensitivity of currently deployed ambient methods. Particulate Matter (PM2 5 and PM10) NAAQS: Changes must be proposed by late November 2010 and finalized by late July 2011. EPA is consulting with CASAC on the appropriate methods and network design that might be needed to support a secondary PM NAAQS designed to protect urban visibility. Available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/monstratdoc.html Final Guidance May?, 2010 AppendixC-1 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring information through continuous monitoring, better support development of improved air quality simulation models, etc.). EPA finalized revisions to the ambient air monitoring regulations in 20062 to align the ambient air monitoring requirements with the themes and objectives of the monitoring strategy. The new regulations also added some new monitoring requirements with implementation dates ranging from January 1, 2007 to January 1, 2011. Additional Key Monitoring Highlights Continued improvement of the ambient air monitoring program: > > NCore stations to be fully operational by January 1 , 2011 The first 5-year assessment of each States Air Quality Monitoring Network is due to EPA by July 1,2010. Daily speciation through a combination of filter- based and continuous methods in a small number of cities to support multiple objectives including accelerating the pace of health studies Emphasis on air toxics "hot-spots" such as schools as part of next community-scale monitoring projects As part of its commitment to review each NAAQS within a five-year period, EPA has recently reviewed and revised NAAQS for particulate matter (PM), ozone (63), lead (Pb), and nitrogen dioxide (NC^). EPA also has proposed changes to the sulfur dioxide (802) primary NAAQS, and remains on schedule to review all primary and secondary NAAQS within a five-year period. In the case of the recent ozone NAAQS, which is being reconsidered, the review period is shorter than five years. All of the final NAAQS rules have resulted in either necessary revision to the monitoring requirements to better support the revised NAAQS. In the case of ozone monitoring, improvements in coverage of unmonitored areas and the addition of several months of monitoring to the ozone season should result. EPA is working closely with its partners through forums such as the Ambient Air Monitoring Committee of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) and the Ambient Air Monitoring Steering Committee (co-chaired by the NACAA State and local Monitoring Co- chairs and the Director of EPA's Air Quality Assessment Division within the Office of Air and Radiation's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards) to ensure monitoring agencies and EPA are working together to improve the ambient air monitoring networks for current and future needs. EPA has also scheduled numerous consultative meetings with the Ambient Air Methods and Monitoring Subcommittee (AAMMS) of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CAS AC) to obtain independent reviews of proposed monitoring changes. Given the multitude of NAAQS reviews in progress, the following Table C-l has been provided to: help assist agencies in understanding the status of each NAAQS review; identify important dates that affect monitoring implementation; and find where more detailed information can be reviewed. 2 40 CFR Part 53 and Part 58, October 17, 2006. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 AppendixC-2 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Table C-l - Summary of NAAQS Implementation Timeline for Ambient Monitoring NAAQS NO2 - Primary NAAQS and Monitoring Lead- Monitoring Ozone - PfTmflTV £111 H JT i iiiidi y diiu. oGconQciry NAAQS Ozone Monitoring S02- Primary NAAQS and Monitoring SO, andNO2 - Secondary NAAQS and Monitoring CO - Primary and Secondary NAAQS and Monitoring PM - Primary and Secondary NAAQS and Monitoring Date of Proposed or Final Rule, if available Final rule signed January 25, 2010 Proposed Rule - Signed December 23, 2009 Proposed Rule - Signed January 6, 2010 Proposed Monitoring Rule Published July 16, 2009 Proposed Rule - Published December 8 , 2009 Final Rule - expected by June 2 2010 Proposal expected by July 12,2011 Proposed rule expected by October 28,2010. Final rule expected by May 13, 2011 Proposal expected no later than November 2011. Final rule expected late July 2011. Summary of Changes to Monitoring • Addition of near- roadway monitoring • Area- wide monitoring remains and becomes required • Require monitoring near lead sources with emissions of 0.5 to 1.0 tons per year. • Addition of non-source lead monitors at NCore stations. Date Monitoring must be Operating by: January 1,2013 Monitors would need to be in place by one-year after final rule is effective. Estimate of summer 20 1 1 for revised monitoring to begin. No specific changes for monitoring. Slightly more required monitors would be triggered by existing rules if more protective NAAQS is finalized Lengthening the ozone monitoring season where appropriate; addition of monitors in: • smaller urban areas not already required to monitor; and • non-urban areas to characterize ozone in sensitive ecosystems and provide coverage in less populated areas. Monitoring would be required in Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA's) based on population size and SO2 emissions. Additional monitoring would also be required based on the States contribution to national SO2 emissions, which could be placed either within or outside a CBSA's. Ozone monitoring season changes would take effect on the first day of the revised ozone monitoring season in 2011. Revisions to the ozone network would take place on the first day of the ozone monitoring season in 2012 January 1,2013 NAAQS review on-going NAAQS review on-going NAAQS review on-going. Review includes assessment of a potential separate secondary PM NAAQS for urban visibility. More information on final/proposed rule available at: http: //www.epa. gov/air/nit rogenoxides/actions.html# ju!09 http: //www.epa. go v/air/lea d/actions.html#dec09 http: //www.epa. gov/air/oz onepollution/actions.html http: //www.epa. gov/air/sul furdioxide/actions.htmWn ov09 http: //www.epa. gov/ttn/na aqs/standards/no2 so2 sec/i ndex html http: //www.epa. gov/ttn/na aqs/standards/co/s_co_ind ex.html http: //www.epa. gov/air/pa rticlepollution/ Final Guidance May?, 2010 AppendixC-3 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring This document provides guidance on the use of section 103 and 105 STAG resources for air toxics and criteria pollutant monitoring networks, as well as important associated networks such as the Chemical Speciation Network (CSN), IMPROVE, and PAMS. The document provides information on directions and priorities for ambient monitoring that attempt to take into account the emerging needs identified in various NAAQS reviews while adhering to the themes identified in the Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy for State, Local, and Tribal Air Agencies. These include an emphasis on multi-pollutant monitoring and favoring continuous over integrated PM samplers. This guidance is also consistent with the revisions to the ambient air monitoring regulations for applicable monitoring of NCore, lead, and NC>2 as well as what is proposed for SC>2. Guidance associated with NAAQS pollutants that have not had a recent review (i.e., carbon monoxide, and nitrogen dioxide/sulfur dioxide secondary NAAQS monitoring needs) have not been provided since this work is still in review. Highlights of Changes in Monitoring Funding for FY 2011 For FY 2011, EPA has requested an additional $15 million in STAG resources to help fund additional monitoring required as a result of revising the NAAQS for lead, NC>2, and ozone. EPA intends to use the $15 million for purchasing monitoring equipment using the section 103 authority of the CAA. Beginning in FY 2011, and through FY 2014, EPA proposes to transition the funding authority for PM2.5 monitoring from section 103 to 105. We continue to seek input from states and locals on the most useful way to carry this out over the 4-year transition period. Federal funding for on-going operations of all other pollutants is proposed to be provided utilizing section 105 authority. EPA will work with the states on the deployment of new monitors, including minimizing expenses to EPA and the states, as a result of the various changes to the NAAQS. Some additional details of EPA's plans for funding monitoring in FY 2011 follow: EPA proposes to target $2.7M in §105 funds to Regions for award to states for the on-going operation and maintenance of the revised lead network, based on the 2008 Lead NAAQS and monitoring rulemaking and the anticipated impact of the lead monitoring revisions that were proposed in December 2009. The $2.7M represents the 60% Federal share of the expected $4.5M in costs it will take to operate the lead network in FY 2011. Funds for lead monitoring and program support have been included in the amount of funds targeted for the Regions for direct award to section 105 recipients and will need to be separately identified. In developing the PM2.5 monitoring allocation for FY 2011, OAR will employ the same region- by-region funding approach used in prior years - e.g., determination of per month costs of operating the existing network. This cost per month is based on examining prior year grants in detail and determining a cost per month for each grantee. For FY 2010, all PM2.s monitoring grants are expected to end on March 31, 2011. Therefore, funding for FY 2011 will be for a 12 month period beginning April 1, 2011. For the PM2.5 network, EPA considers the overall size of the existing Federal Reference Method (FRM)/Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) network adequate for implementing the revised NAAQS. Regional offices and the states should consider: (a) whether the current network of FRM/FEM and supplemental PM2.s speciation sites is optimal for supporting implementation of Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -4 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring the revised PM2.5 NAAQS, and (b) how samplers among stations and even funds among states would need to be shifted to provide equitable access to the speciation data needed to understand the causes of 24-hour NAAQS nonattainment for each prospective nonattainment area. Also, changes in population exposure and emissions patterns may mean that a small number of sites each year may need to be re-located. Any possible changes to the PM^ network are to be identified in the respective agencies annual monitoring network plan due to the applicable EPA Region by July 1 of each year according to §58.10 - Annual Monitoring Network Plan and Periodic Network Assessment. • For FY 2011 there will be changes in the unit cost of PM2.5 filters and speciation laboratory services provided as associated program support due to pre-negotiated contract increases in unit prices. As a placeholder until monitoring agencies inform EPA of their planned use of filters and laboratory services in 2010, EPA proposes to initially reserve funds as associated program support based on an assumption that the number of filters and the number of monitoring sites requiring laboratory services will be the same in 2011 as in 2010. • EPA is beginning the second year of a five-year contract for chemical analysis and reporting of the Speciation Trends Network (STN) and supplemental stations that make up a large portion of the Chemical Speciation Network (CSN). The other major component of the CSN is the IMPROVE protocol stations run by state, local, and tribal agencies. Laboratory and reporting services for IMPROVE protocol stations are provided as part of an interagency agreement with the National Park Service. The Speciation Trends Network (STN) operates every third day and the supplemental stations nominally operate every sixth day. Under the new contract, all STN and supplemental stations are now supported with Teflon and nylon filter modules for the Met One SASS or Met One SuperSASS samplers. • Funding for the portion of the IMPROVE program that addresses progress in improving visibility in Class I areas will remain the same as in previous years. This includes funding for the 110 IMPROVE stations needed to meet the regional haze rule requirements of states monitoring Class I areas for long-term trends through and beyond the 10-year SIP period (2008 to 2018). This is also useful in the periodic assessments of progress that are required in achieving the national visibility goal. • The level of funds for the nationally administered, independent Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) provided as associated program support for PM2.5 monitoring is expected to be approximately $1.5 million. Monitoring agencies with an adequate level of independence between quality assurance and monitoring groups may conduct the PEP themselves. In these cases monitoring agencies that conduct the PEP will receive the refundable portion of the EPA program costs that would otherwise have been used to pay for EPA regional lab contract staff. • EPA has developed a lead (Pb) Performance Evaluation Program (Pb-PEP). The PEP is required to support the requirements of the 2008 Lead NAAQS and monitoring final rule. This program will operate similar to the PM2.5 PEP with a call letter for participation to be sent at the same time as the call for participation in other federally implemented performance evaluation programs. Where federally implemented, EPA Regional ESAT contract staff are expected to leverage audits for multiple programs when visiting an area. The cost of participation in this program is still being developed and will depend on the number of participating agencies, the Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -5 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring number of stations to audit each year, and the number of audits that can be leveraged with other activities during an area visit. • The level of funds for the nationally administered, independent National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) is expected to be approximately $454,000. This level assumes no significant increase in monitoring sites for FY 2011. Table C-l shows that potential increases in the number of monitoring sites will occur in 2012 and later. Similar to the PEP, in the NPAP, monitoring agencies with an adequate level of independence between quality assurance and monitoring groups may conduct the NPAP themselves and receive the §105 funds that otherwise would have supported their participation in the national program. In FY 2011 it is expected that most NCore sites will be running and a percentage will require NPAP audits. Current NPAP analyzers will need to be replaced to accomplish audits at the lower levels needed for the NCore program and required by the 2006 revisions to Appendix A of the monitoring requirements, 40 CFR Part 58. In 2011, $135,000 is proposed to be allocated to upgrade half of the NPAP mobile laboratories with high sensitivity audit equipment. • In FY 2011, EPA anticipates that there may be shifts in PM2.5 monitoring funds used to support laboratory analysis for chemical speciation at NCore stations. • For FY 2011, EPA proposes to utilize $150,000 prorated from each PAMS recipient, to perform regional and national scale assessments of the network and of the data. This is planned to be follow-up to the existing assessments to enhance the usefulness and utility of the PAMS data. Assessments will be performed to address a number of questions on the wealth of data collected by agencies operating PAMS. As in the past, EPA will solicit input among PAMS data users, including State and local agencies, on priorities for national and regional assessments. In the preliminary allocation these funds are contained within the respective region by region allotments. • For F Y 2011, EPA proposes to reserve of 5% of the PAMS funds ($700K) for the expressed purpose of purchasing new capital equipment (e.g., gas chromatographs and upper air meteorology equipment) for participating agencies. All funds will be utilized as either direct award to a PAMS program or equipment will be purchased and provided. PAMS equipment upgrades are being made since several PAMS agencies have reported they are unable to purchase new equipment and much of their existing inventory of PAMS monitoring equipment is outdated. EPA will work closely with affected PAMS agencies to ensure the most effective approach is utilized to purchase equipment. In the preliminary allocation these funds are contained within the respective region by region allotments. • In FY 2011, EPA anticipates funding air toxics monitoring at the existing 27 National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS). • For the 2011 community-scale air toxics funds, EPA plans to continue support for monitoring projects involving "hot-spots," such as locations where communities that may be impacted from a local source or sources with elevated levels of air toxics emissions. EPA will emphasize monitoring in disproportionately affected communities, including the pilot areas included under the joint OAR/OECA air toxics initiative. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -6 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Fine Particulate (PMi.s) Monitoring Network The PM2 5 monitoring network includes three well-established components: the network of filter-based FRM/FEMs used for comparison to the NAAQS; continuous mass monitors used in public reporting of the Air Quality Index; and speciation program samplers and monitors. The latter include the Speciation Trends Network, supplemental speciation sites, and the IMPROVE program that is used to characterize the chemical composition that makes up fine particulate matter. Smaller dynamic components of the PM2.5 monitoring program include a small network of continuous speciation monitors and the measurement of precursors to PM2 5 at NCore multi- pollutant stations. Areas of interest to enhance PM monitoring include expanding the network of PM2.s continuous monitors with recently approved FEMs and planning for daily speciation sampling in a small number of the most populated cities in the country where this information can support data needs in a state and for use in helping expedite health studies. The PM2.5 NAAQS was last updated in October of 2006. At that time EPA revised the PM2.5 NAAQS by lowering the 24-hour (or daily) standard from 65|ig/m3 to 35|ig/m3. EPA also retained the existing annual fine particle standard at 15 |ig/m3. EPA is actively reviewing the PM NAAQS and expects to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking by November 2010, with a final rulemaking by July 2011. In planning a PM2 5 monitoring network for 2011, agencies are expected to use information from their five-year assessment due to each Regional Office by July 1, 2010 for any immediate changes that need to be addressed. Such changes should be proposed in this year's annual monitoring network plan due the same date. For example, agencies should continue to optimize their networks with information supported from their assessment that is necessary to meet the network design criteria described in Appendix D to Part 58. However, given that a PM NAAQS proposal is expected in November 2010, EPA is not expecting substantial changes in 2011. EPA does envision that state/local agencies will continue to maintain a large robust network of PM2.5 monitors to support several monitoring objectives including protection of public health through the NAAQS. Overall Direction FY 2011 continues the multi-year transition of the ambient air monitoring carried out by state and local air monitoring agencies along the path outlined by the Monitoring Strategy. For PM2.5 this means continued operation of high value FRM and speciation sites; PM2.5 continuous monitoring and associated data management systems for timely reporting of high quality data; and precursor gas analyzers, data analyses and quality assurance activities that will support better understanding of particle formation. With several recently approved PM2.5 continuous FEMs, monitoring agencies may replace existing PM2 5 SLAMS sites operating filter-based FRMs with continuous FEMs. The networks will continue operation of high value sites, with investments and divestments. To provide a clearer understanding of the expected outcomes of the ambient air monitoring objectives, the following goals for the fine particulate monitoring network have been developed: Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -7 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring • Appropriate spatial characterization of PM2.5 NAAQS; • Public Reporting of PM2.5 in the AQI; • Characterization of PM2.5 chemical speciation data for long term trends, development and accountability of emission control programs, tracking of regional haze, and for use in health studies; • Operation of NCore trace-level CO, SO2, NO2/NOy and PM (PM2.5 and PMio-2.5) monitoring to support characterization of PM precursors; • Assessment of PM2.5 data quality; • Procurement and testing of PM2.5 filters. Disinvestments and other Changes For FY 2011, EPA is not expecting significant changes to the PM2 5 monitoring networks. EPA is planning to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking on the PM NAAQS by November 2010, with a final rule by July 2011. Also, in 2010, monitoring agencies will be working on their five-year assessments which, when combined with final decisions from the PM NAAQS review, will help to shape any future changes to the PM2 5 monitoring networks. Any such changes, if necessary, would likely begin to occur no sooner than in FY 2012 or beyond. In cases where the five-year assessment shows problems with the currently deployed networks (e.g., the current network design is not being appropriately implemented) EPA encourages addressing that issue in this years annual monitoring network plan. Chemical speciation data from the Speciation Trends Network, IMPROVE, and the remaining supplemental speciation sites will continue to be utilized to track progress over time as the national and local control programs are implemented. There are some areas that are expected to be in residual nonattainment for PM2 5 even after the national control strategies are implemented or that may be designated nonattainment with the revised 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In these cases the regional office and the state, and where appropriate, local agencies should work out an appropriate network design for the chemical speciation component of their PM2 5 monitoring network as part of their annual network review within the available allocation,. States and local agencies may consider divesting of low-value supplemental speciation stations in areas that are not expected to be in violation of the PM2.5 NAAQS. As in 2010, monitoring organizations will again be asked to determine whether they plan on implementing the PM2 5 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) or allow for continued Federal implementation of this program. Monitoring organizations must meet the minimum requirements of adequate and independent in order to implement the PEP. OAQPS has provided guidance to regional offices on how to assess adequacy and independence of proposed audit programs.3 Information on this decision process will be provided in a memorandum from the EPA regional office to the monitoring organizations each year in order to make decisions that will affect the next calendar year audit activities. OAQPS anticipates that a FY 2011 guidance memorandum covering details on participation in the PM2 5 PEP will be issued to the EPA regional offices in June 2010. 3 January 8, 2007 memorandum from Phil Lorang (Ambient Air Monitoring Group Leader) to Regional Office ambient monitoring managers. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -8 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Investments EPA's Office of Research and Development has now approved several PM2.5 continuous monitors as FEMs.4 These methods are now available and their data can be compared to the NAAQS as well as for public reporting of the Air Quality Index (AQI). Monitoring agencies that are comfortable with an approved FEM could benefit by discontinuing operation of some or all (with the exception of required FRMs for QA purposes) of their FRMs, which tend to be costly to operate due to pre- and post- sampling laboratory analysis. These savings could be used to pay for some of the cost of the new monitors; however, capital acquisition funds would need to be provided up-front for the new monitors. Therefore, EPA regions will work closely with state and local agencies within the existing funding allocations on whether new monitors should be purchased. Technical direction on implementing and reporting data from continuous PM2.5 FEM and FRM monitors is available on EPA's AMTIC web site.5 Gas monitoring with high sensitivity measurements of CO, SO2, and NO/NOy will continue as part of the PM2 5 monitoring network to support characterization of PM precursors in FY 2011. Planning over the last few years has resulted in funding being available for all approved NCore multi-pollutant sites for these pollutants. EPA will also be working with state and local agencies to pilot a small number of PM2 5 continuous mass monitors and ammonia samplers where funds are available. For daily speciation, EPA expects to work with a small number of monitoring agencies to pilot daily characterization of fine particle chemical speciation using a combination of continuous and filter- based technologies. One solution might include post-sampling laboratory analysis of elements on Teflon filters with semi-continuous operation of sulfate and carbon monitors. Monitoring agencies may also find it useful to use a portion of their direct awards to implement additional meteorology equipment that supports forecasting of the AQI. Of specific interest may be recently commercialized, high quality, and lower priced instruments that characterize the vertical thermal structure of the boundary layer. For FY 2011, PM2.5 monitoring grant funds allocated to states can be directed towards improvements in data management systems to support timely reporting of high quality data from PM continuous mass monitors, PM continuous speciation monitors, and precursor gas monitors. Resources dedicated to this area will support processing, validating, and reporting of data that supports the PM monitoring program. In late 2011, EPA expects to host a comprehensive National Ambient Air Monitoring Conference. This conference was last held in November of 2009. EPA and state and local agencies will both benefit by strong participation in this conference to manage and enhance the ambient air monitoring program. EPA regions are encouraged to make participation in the conference a condition of each agency's PM2.s monitoring grant. 4 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria. html 5 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/datamang.html Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C -9 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Distribution of Funds The FY 2011 national program guidance does not yet include a final allocation of PM2.5 monitoring funds among regional offices for use in direct awards based on a schedule for phasing out the use of section 103 authority. Pursuant to the EPA-NACAA retreat and the follow-up workgroups created, EPA will be consulting further with stakeholders on this topic. In addition we are still seeking comment on how to allocate PM2.5 monitoring funding in light of remaining implementation issues associated with NCore and in consideration of rising contract costs for speciation laboratory support, filter procurement, and contract support for the QA-PEP program. A final allocation will include tables that will provide more detailed information on the region-by-region allocation including cost estimates for associated program support. Cost estimates will be based on an assumption that monitoring organizations will not reduce their networks (and the services/ materials needed to support them) in 2011 compared to previous years. The estimates should help inform how the program costs may change this coming year and are subject to change based on monitoring organizations' actual plans for the numbers of sites that will need these services in FY 2011.6 These numbers may decline if states choose not to maintain their existing PM2.5 monitoring networks. For more information on PM2.5 monitoring, contact Tim Hanley at 919-541-4417 or via email at hanley.tim@epa.gov. For additional information on the follow-up workgroups relating to resource issues stemming from the OAR-NACAA retreat, contact Jerry Kurtzweg at 202-564- 1234. Monitoring Networks for Other NAAQS Pollutants Support of Established NAAQS Networks With a number of NAAQS decisions already final or to be final by FY 2011, EPA will need to work closely with affected air monitoring programs on deploying new or revised monitoring networks, where necessary. This section summarizes both the new monitoring that will need to be implemented during FY 2011 as well as new operations and maintenance for monitoring that needs to be operational during FY 2011 for NAAQS. These areas are traditionally funded using section 105 authority and include: ozone, lead (Pb), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (802), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), PMio, and PMio-2.5-7 Of these pollutants, ozone has the most 6 State and local agencies have costs associated with many activities within each monitoring program area. Not all types of operating expenses may be accounted for. Some of these costs are fairly well understood such as capital infrastructure, salaries of staff and management working on the program, and costs of expendable items used in the program. Less obvious, but important to include in planning operation of a network, are costs of participating in conferences and workshops that support training and building further expertise in agencies operating the network. 7 On October 17, 2006 EPA revoked the annual PM10 NAAQS everywhere. 71 FR 61144. The 24-hour PM10 NAAQS was retained everywhere. No NAAQS was established for PM10_2.5. On the same day, EPA also promulgated a Federal Reference Method for PM10_2 5 and certain monitoring requirements for PM10_2 5 as part of the new NCore network with an implementation dateof January 1,2011. 71FR61236. A plan for PM10.2.5 monitoring at NCore is due by July 1,2009. FY 2009 grant funds should be used to begin development of this plan. EPA is not requiring that any FY 2009 or FY 2010 grant funds be used to implement PM10.2.5 monitoring, although that is an eligible use of grant funds where negotiated between a Regional Office and a recipient. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 10 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring robust network with over 1200 stations across the country. Networks for CO, 862, NC>2, and PMio are still maintained in most agencies with minor divestments over the last several years (see figure C-2). However, for lead there has been a substantially larger divestment due to almost all monitoring stations being substantially below the previous lead (Pb) NAAQS. Beginning in 2010, the number of required lead started to increase as the source-oriented monitors required by the 2008 Lead NAAQS and monitoring final rule became operational. Additional information on each network is summarized below. In March 2008, EPA strengthened the ozone NAAQS by revising the 8-hour standard to a level of 0.075 ppm. However, EPA is now reconsidering the ozone NAAQS and on January 6, 2010 issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on this matter. Although a large and robust ozone monitoring network already operating in most urban areas across the country, EPA has also issued a proposal - separate from the ozone NAAQS - to address changes to the ozone monitoring requirements. Changes to the ozone monitoring requirements are necessary to implement the revised ozone NAAQS including changes to the required ozone season, requirements for minimum monitors in smaller urban areas - where monitoring is not currently required, and requirements for non-urban areas such as sensitive ecosystems. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 2009 and is expected to be finalized in 2010 in conjunction with the reconsideration of the ozone NAAQS. We estimate that the new monitoring needs for ozone will result in a total of 268 new stations. Of that total, 178 stations will be at new locations with new monitors, while 90 stations will be monitors moved from existing stations. Changes to the ozone monitoring season are currently proposed to begin on the first day of the new ozone monitoring season in FY 201 1. Funding needs associated with changes to the ozone monitoring requirements will be dedicated over a two-year period in FY 2011 and FY 2012. Table C-2 Number of Monitoring Stations by Pollutant 1998 -2008 1,200 •5 800 I = soo — Carbon Monoxide 200:]: Year In October of 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the lead NAAQS from 1.5 |ig/m3 to 0.15 |ig/m3 as measured by total suspended particulate. For lead, the existing lead monitoring Final Guidance May 7, 2010 AppendixC-11 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring network was considered inadequate to implement the revised lead NAAQS and therefore, changes to the lead monitoring requirements were included along with the revised lead NAAQS. EPA required that near-source monitors associated with emissions of more than one ton per year begin operating by January 1, 2010 and non-source monitoring by January 1, 2011. However, EPA is reconsidering the lead monitoring requirements by potentially adding a requirement for monitoring near sources associated with emissions of between one half and one ton per year as well as a change to the requirement for non-source monitoring. EPA will work with state and local agencies to finish their lead network and proposes to dedicate approximately $2.7M to $3.1M in one-time FY 2011 funds to support additional monitoring network expansions. The final rule supporting the reconsideration of lead monitoring is expected to be finalized during the summer of 2010. On January 22, 2010, EPA strengthened the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS with the addition of a one-hour standard to capture peaks associated with short-term exposures to this pollutant. This final rule provides for the implementation of a near-roadway monitoring network for NC>2 at 165 new locations. EPA will work closely with States on planning this new addition to the ambient air monitoring program. On December 8, 2009 EPA published a proposal to strengthen the sulfur dioxide (802) NAAQS. Ambient air monitoring would be required according to population and the amount of SO2 emissions in an area. Additional monitoring would also be required based on the contribution of the States SO2 emissions to the national total of emissions of this pollutant. Note: In the proposed rulemaking, EPA is seeking comment on a two-year deployment. In addition to revising networks for lead, ozone, NO2, and SO2, FY 2011 STAG grant funds should be utilized for on-going ambient monitoring programs to support: • National and local spatial characterization of ozone (O3) relative to the NAAQS; • National and local public reporting of O3 in the AQI; • Local public reporting of CO, SO2, NO2, and PM10 in the AQI for areas where these pollutants are of concern; • Operation and maintenance of NCore stations beyond the leveraged funds provided under the PM2.5 monitoring program; • Local characterization of the CO, SO2, NO2, and PM10 NAAQS in the few areas with NAAQS non-attainment and maintenance issues; • In addition to the monitoring provided for above, limited characterization of O3, CO, SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 data in all other areas for long term trends, support for long- term health and scientific assessments, and development and accountability of emission control programs as part of a multi-pollutant approach to air quality management; • Assessment of O3, CO, SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 data quality; • Analysis and interpretation of the O3, PAMS, CO, SO2, NO2, Pb, and PM10 monitoring data and development of data assessment tools; • Procurement and testing of PM10 filters, including 46.2 mm Teflon filters used in low- volume PM10 samplers; • Independent and adequate assessment of these pollutants' data quality, which is required in 40 CFR Part 58. This assessment is based on audit data generated under the National Performance Audit Program (NPAP). State and local agencies will choose either to Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 12 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring obtain audit services through EPA-managed contracts funded with STAG funds, or may operate equivalent state-managed programs using independent staff, equipment, and standards. In some regions, EPA staff may perform or assist in audits with no charge to STAG funds, depending on staff and travel funds availability. • Reporting and certification of ambient air monitoring data required8 to be submitted to the Air Quality System (AQS) database. In 2010 the date of certification moves up from July 1 to May 1. Ambient Air Performance Evaluation Programs A performance evaluation is a type of audit where quantitative data is collected independently in order to evaluate the proficiency of an analyst, laboratory, or some or all of the component parts of a data collection activity. EPA implements a number of performance evaluation programs on behalf of the monitoring agencies. Two major federally implemented performance evaluation efforts include the National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) for the gaseous pollutants and the Pb-Performance Evaluation Program National Performance Audit Program (NPAP) The NPAP is a cooperative effort among OAQPS, the EPA regional offices, the monitoring organizations that operate EPA-funded air pollution monitors, and the other organizations that operate air monitors for example at PSD sites. The implementation goals of the NPAP are to audit approximately 20 percent of the monitoring sites in the Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network each year. Although it is a goal to visit every monitoring site generating data that has significance to the air quality program within a 5-year period, among these sites there is an emphasis on auditing higher priority monitors (e.g., sites prioritized for health risk reasons) more frequently. In 2011, the requirement for adequate independent audits applies to sites with monitoring types not designated as "non-regulatory. The NPAP program uses a through-the-probe (TTP) audit system, where appropriate for the monitoring situation given a site's physical layout. This system has the advantage of testing the performance of the entire monitoring sampling train including inlets and manifolds, and provides station operators immediate feedback on the audit results. Each year, monitoring organizations are asked whether they plan on implementing the NPAP or would prefer continued Federal implementation of this program using STAG funds. Any non- EPA audits arranged by monitoring organizations must meet the minimum requirements of being adequate and independent. Additional guidance on demonstrating that a state-implemented program meets these minimums will be provided in a memorandum early in the calendar year. Under this approach EPA reserves a portion of appropriated STAG funds to cover potential Federal implementation of the NPAP, based on the number of geographically separate monitoring sites (not the number of distinct monitors) within each EPA Region. The initial reserve of FY 2011 funds is estimated to be approximately $454,000. This is based on EPA's current understanding of monitoring organizations' intentions for how NPAP audits will be implemented in 2010. If the number of sites in a Region to be audited by EPA 1 §58.15 - Annual air monitoring data certification, and §58.16 - Data submittal and archiving requirements. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 13 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring staffer EPA-managed contractors is reduced because more monitoring organizations plan on implementing a program of adequate and independent NPAP audits without reliance on EPA contractors, and those organizations are assessed by the EPA regions as capable to perform the NPAP by September 2010, a corresponding amount of STAG funds will be made available to the regional office for allocation as direct awards. The amount of funds held by EPA to perform the NPAP includes both a fixed cost associated with programs tools and equipment such as standard operating procedures and hardware and variable costs such as the operator time and travel costs associated with the number of audits conducted. The September 2010 cutoff date gives EPA time to make necessary contracting and other arrangements for the audits it will manage in 2011. Since the start of the NPAP through the probe (TTP) in 2002, capital equipment has not been replaced or upgraded. With the NCore sites coming on line, the NPAP mobile laboratories will need to replace analyzers and calibration equipment that will be able to challenge the higher sensitivity equipment that is being implemented not only at NCore sites, but at routine monitoring sites where monitoring organizations are replacing older equipment with the trace level analyzers. Therefore, $135,000 is proposed to be allocated to outfit half of the NPAP audit trailers in FY 2011, with the other half planned for upgrade in FY 2012. Lead Performance Evaluation Program (Pb-PEP) The implementation of a Pb-PEP is a new requirement starting in calendar year 2010 and it provides an assessment of overall bias at the primary quality assurance organization (PQAO) level. PQAO is defined in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix A. The program will be a mix of one or two PM2.5 PEP like audits with additional collocated sampling. The program will require the same number of audit samples as required for PM2.5 meaning: o PQAOs with < 5 sites require 5 audits (1 PEP, 4 collocated) o PQAOs with > 5 sites require 8 audits (2 PEP, 6 collocated) The Pb-PEP audits consist of the implementation of a separate portable TSP Pb audit sampler that is placed within 2-4 meters of the routine Pb sampler, is operated by an independent auditor and the sample is shipped to an independent Pb-PEP laboratory for analysis. For the collocated samples, each quarter the monitoring organization field operator will take one additional collocated sample and send this sample to the independent Pb-PEP laboratory for analysis. Similar to the PM2.5 PEP and the NPAP, implementation decisions for Pb-PEP are made by the monitoring organizations on an annual basis. EPA will draft a memo to the monitoring organizations to determine whether they plan to self implement the Pb-PEP or utilize the federally implemented program using STAG funds. Any non-EPA audits arranged by monitoring organizations must meet the minimum requirements of being adequate and independent. The definition for adequate and independent for Pb-PEP is very similar to PM2.5 PEP and the requirements were developed in the August 6, 2009 memo which can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npepqa.html. The EPA regions will collect this information from the monitoring organizations and provide the information to OAQPS in time to redirect the appropriate STAG funds for the federally implemented program. Under this approach EPA reserves a portion of appropriated STAG funds to cover potential Federal implementation of the Pb-PEP, based on the number of monitoring sites (not the number Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 14 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring of distinct monitors) within each PQAO within a Region. The amount of funds that would be reserved by EPA to perform the Pb-PEP includes both a fixed cost associated with programs tools and equipment such as standard operating procedures and hardware and consumables and variable costs such as the operator time and travel costs associated with the number of audits conducted. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring System (PAMS) Required by section 182(c)(l) of the Clean Air Act, the PAMS program collects ambient air measurements in areas classified as serious, severe, or extreme ozone nonattainment. Each PAMS area collects data for a target list of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), NOX, NOy, and ozone, as well as surface and upper air meteorological measurements. • Monitoring rule amendments published on October 17, 2006 greatly reduced the minimum PAMS requirements. The revisions were intended to require the retention of the minimum common PAMS network elements necessary to meet the objectives of every PAMS program, while freeing up resources for states to tailor other features of their own PAMS networks to suit their specific data needs. Overall, the changes significantly reduced the costs of the minimum PAMS monitoring requirements, but it was not EPA's intention to require or encourage a reduction in the overall level of PAMS monitoring. Consistent with recent years, FY 2011 STAG funds will support four types of PAMS activities: monitoring system implementation and operation including replacement of aging equipment, data reporting to AQS, data analysis, and quality assurance. Also, regions are to plan and as appropriate approve the use of some of these funds to replace or upgrade aging or obsolete equipment. For FY 2011, about $14 million is targeted for operation of the PAMS network. Of this, $10.5 million has nominally been allocated for program implementation and operation, data reporting, and QA. Three and one-half million dollars has been nominally allocated for data analysis by state and local agencies. However, Regional Offices have had the flexibility to allow states to adjust this split and even to use a portion of their designated PAMS funds for other purposes. Table C-3 shows the FY 2011 allocation of PAMS funds within the regional allotments. These PAMS funds are included in the ozone category of the national region-by-region allocation. EPA is also working with its state and local partners that are involved in PAMS in an assessment of the program. This PAMS assessment includes a workgroup of representatives from EPA, state, local, and multi-state agencies. Outcomes of the assessment have identified many insightful interpretations of the data, but also the need for additional follow-up work. EPA will further consult with state and local agencies on the use of $150,000 that would be prorated from each PAMS Region during FY 2011 for follow-up assessment and new data analysis work. The PAMS program has been operational since the mid 1990's and as such for a number of agencies the monitoring equipment is becoming significantly aged. Some agencies have been able to upgrade or buy new equipment from within their existing, allocation; however, due to the Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 15 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring high initial capital cost, many other agencies have reported they are not able to set aside enough funds from within one year to purchase these large capital cost items. For FY 2011, EPA is also proposing to reserve 5% of the PAMS funds ($700K) for the expressed purpose of purchasing new capital equipment (e.g., gas chromatographs and upper air meteorology equipment) for participating PAMS agencies. EPA will work with all PAMS agencies to set up an equipment replacement plan over a multi-year period. Table C-3. Distribution of FY 2011 Funds for PAMS Support Region 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 National Data Analysis Equipment Replacement Totals Number of PAMS Areas 5 I1 3 1 22 5 0 0 73 0 Local Data Analysis $726,297 $232,415 $348,623 $145,259 $290,519 $617,603 $0 $0 $1,162,075 $0 Implementatior and Operation $2,125,815 $571,060 $1,087,907 $366,848 $959,749 $2,061,029 $0 $0 $3,307,303 $0 24 $3,522,791 $10,479,711 Total with proposed $150K set aside for national data analysis and $700K set aside for equipment replacement $2,678,979 $754,701 $1,349,328 $481,020 $1,174,372 $2,516,030 $4,198,071 $0 $150,000 $700,000 $14,002,502 1 Shares one PAMS area with Region 3. 2 Chicago and Milwaukee have a combined network. 3 So. Coast & Mojave Desert AQMDs have a combined network Notwithstanding a re-allocation, and in light of the recent changes in PAMS requirements, regional offices should still re-examine the current split between data analysis Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-16 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring and implementation and operations with their recipients rather than strictly adhere to the splits shown in Table C-3. Regional offices may also consider other departures from historical funding practices, for example providing more funds to a particular state in FY 2011 to support a needed one-time intensive study, with temporarily reduced funding for routine PAMS monitoring in other states. EPA recognizes that the PAMS sites are a major source of data on air toxics including some of the toxics that contribute significantly to the total risk from air toxics in some of the largest cities. The regions, state and local monitoring agencies should keep this dual purpose in mind as the plan network changes in FY 2011 and beyond. For example, as speciated VOC sampling is reduced at type 4 sites, consideration should be given to moving to auto-GC sampling at the remaining PAMS sites. FY 2011 PAMS Activities for State and Local Agencies The allocated PAMS funds should be used to meet the following objectives: (1) Continue System Implementation • Reduce number of monitoring sites and monitoring at remaining sites, while remaining in compliance with revised PAMS regulations or approved alternative plans developed as part of reconfiguration efforts. • Operate remaining existing sites, including replacement of aging equipment. • Continue to improve NOX monitoring, replacing NOX instruments with NOy/NO instrumentation and/or more sensitive NO2/NOX monitors at select PAMS sites. • Install and operate trace level CO monitors at Type II sites. • Develop and conduct area specific ozone precursor studies based on area specific needs. • Continue making surface measurements of wind direction, wind speed, temperature, and humidity at all PAMS sites and additional measurements of solar radiation, ultraviolet radiation, pressure, and precipitation at one site in each PAMS area. • Continue making upper-air measurements of wind direction, wind speed, and temperature at a representative location in each PAMS area. The upper-air monitoring program will depend upon region-specific factors such that the optimum design for a given PAMS region is expected to be some combination of remote sensing and conventional atmospheric soundings. • For PAMS sites collocated with NCore multi-pollutant precursor gas sites, the meteorological monitoring data for ambient temperature, wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity, barometric pressure, and solar radiation are to be submitted to the AirNow program. (2) Data Analysis • Continue to develop and implement PAMS data analysis plans at the state and local levels that demonstrate use of data, provide analyses demonstrating data analysis products and results commensurate with allocated resources targeted for data analysis in grant work plans and the minimum set of PAMS data analyses specified in EPA guidance. • Use PAMS data to develop and optimize control strategies in State Implementation Plan for ozone. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 17 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring • Develop trends in ozone precursors, based on PAMS data that may serve to corroborate "rate-of-progress" and accountability demonstrations. • Use PAMS data to corroborate ozone precursor emissions inventories and to address transport concerns. (3) Data Reporting • All PAMS data, including meteorological data, shall be submitted into AQS consistent with 40 CFR Part 58. • All PAMS data shall be identified in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) as monitor type 'PAMS' or 'Unofficial PAMS'. • Adequate procedures must be developed and followed to ensure proper validation of data prior to submission to AQS. (4) Quality Assurance • All sites must have and operate according to a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) approved by an EPA regional office. • Ensure that adequate and independent audits are conducted for FRM and FEM SLAMS monitors at PAMS sites. These audits are discussed above under 'National Performance Audit Program (NPAP).' Air Toxics Monitoring For FY 2011, the President's request includes resources for the support of national air toxics monitoring and characterization activities. Funds are awarded under §105 authority to continue support for ongoing air toxics monitoring activities initiated and conducted by state and local air quality agencies. In addition, CAA §103 funds are allocated for the support of: (1) continued operation and maintenance of the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) Network, and (2) community-scale air toxics monitoring projects (see Table C-4). Funding for NATTS and community-scale projects is again being requested using §103 authority which enables 100% federal funding. Included in the NATTS program total are three supplemental program components: quality assurance, methods and instrumentation, sample and equipment shipping and handling, and data analyses using all available ambient air quality data for toxics with special emphasis on observations from the NATTS and community-scale monitoring programs. These three components are associated program support for all grants that support air toxics monitoring or management activities. FY 2011 will be the eighth overall year of NATTS data collection, the sixth complete year of NATTS data collection, and the fourth community-scale grant cycle in seven years. The desired program objectives are: • Establish trends and evaluate the effectiveness of air toxics emissions reduction strategies. • Characterize local-scale ambient concentrations that result when air toxics originating from local sources concentrate in relatively small geographical areas, producing the greatest risks to human health. • Provide data to support, evaluate, and improve emission inventories and air quality Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 18 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring models used to develop emission control strategies, perform exposure assessments, and assess program effectiveness. • Provide data to support scientific studies to better understand the relationship between ambient air toxics concentrations, human exposure, and health effects from these exposures. In FY 2011, EPA proposes that approximately $4.1 million in §103 STAG funds be used to fund operation of the National Air Toxics Trends Station (NATTS) Network during the period July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2011. About $0.9 million is proposed to be used for quality assurance, data analysis, sample and equipment shipping and handling, and methods and instrumentation associated with the NATTS program. The NATTS program component will continue to build on the established quality assurance and methods protocols. Laboratory and field staff continue to work with EPA to ascertain the optimum methods for capturing and analyzing core pollutants associated with risk, develop performance based quality indicators to prove valid data results that will contribute to our understanding of risks, and stabilize the measurements for all NATTS sites so that comparisons across the nation can be made. Efforts to further improve methods for hexavalent chromium and acrolein are anticipated to continue through at least 2011, and additional methods development work may include how to best measure coarse particles (PM 10-2.5) for HAP metals and other speciation components to complement the existing measurement of metals in PMio at NATTS. The analytical community will continue to assess trends in air toxics concentration levels, relate those data to associated risk levels, and explore relationships between these ambient and risk levels to emission sources and changes in these levels to emission reduction efforts. The community-scale projects are intended to better characterize air toxics problems at the local level, particularly for disproportionately affected areas, and to address those problems through local actions which complement national regulatory requirements. Such monitoring has the potential to define the scope of local air toxic problems, measure what reductions have been achieved through actions taken, and provide information needed for local policy development on reducing emissions from particular sources. During FY 2011, OAR and OECA, working with regional offices, will focus on further actions needed to reduce risks from air toxics in selected pilot areas. While aimed at meeting local data needs, EPA expects that data, results, and findings from all community-scale projects will also be valuable to other areas and to the national air toxics programs. Hence, a portion of the air toxics STAG funds are used to organize, summarize, and analyze the air toxics data from the community-scale studies and the NATTS sites (and data from other monitoring efforts) and to communicate the findings to all states involved in air toxics management. This includes a data analysis workshop. While EPA anticipates continued support for the characterization of air toxics hotspots at the community level in FY 2011, EPA intends to further consult with stakeholders on the nature and approach for such support. The Agency will produce supplementary information and guidance for FY 2011. For further information regarding prior year community-scale air toxics monitoring projects, including previous solicitations, successful project proposals and final Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C - 19 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring reports, may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atntic/local.httnl. For more information contact Michael Jones in OAQPS' Ambient Air Monitoring Group at 1-919-541-0528, or jones.mike@epa.gov. The FY 2011 allocation categories and amounts are provided in Table C-4. The funding allocation for operation of NATTS sites will be sub-allocated to the regions with state and local agencies hosting those sites. The split of funding among the other listed line items may be adjusted prior to the start of FY 2011 based on consultations with state and local air agency representatives. Funds for other line items listed are anticipated to be used in nationally administered support contracts or competitively awarded to eligible recipients for specific activities. Table C-4 Proposed FY 2011 Funding for Lead, National Air Toxics Trends and Community-Scale Monitoring $4,095,000 $320,000 $300,000 $180,000 $100,000 $3,153,000 $8,148,000 Operation and maintenance of existing and new NATTS sites. NATTS Quality Assurance: includes periodic Proficiency Testing, targeted Technical Systems Audits, and annual data quality assessment via centrally (OAQPS) managed contracts. Data Analysis: delineate and assess trends, data and network assessment to include exploration / demonstration of monitoring data utility in providing local scale findings that are useful in S/L/T air quality program management, and Annual Data Analysis Workshop for EPA and S/L/T' s to share results; synthesize into annual report. Methods and Instrumentation: support for improved air toxics monitoring methodology, especially for priority HAPs for which methods either do not exist, or existing methods have been deemed insufficient to meet end user needs; acquire new, upgrade, or replacement sampling or analytical equipment on a limited, case-by-case, as needed basis in direct support of NATTS. Sample and equipment shipping and handling. Community -scale monitoring projects: EPA is seeking comment on continued support for monitoring projects involving "hot-spot" locations (i.e. significant potential for substantially elevated ambient HAP concentrations arising from local emission sources). Total Funding IMPROVE Visibility Monitoring Network The IMPROVE monitoring program supports the national goal of reducing haze to near natural levels in National Parks and wilderness areas. IMPROVE monitoring sites collect data on visibility, including optical, photographic, and speciated particulate data, though EPA resources are only used for the particle speciation monitoring. EPA works with the Regional Planning Organizations (RPOs) to help states prepare their SIPs for regional haze rule (these were due 12/07). Data from IMPROVE sites are needed to meet the regional haze rule requirements of states for monitoring Class I area long-term trends through and beyond the 10- year SIP period (2008 to 2018), as well as being useful in the required periodic assessments of progress towards the national visibility goal. States also use data from the IMPROVE network to Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-20 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring characterize upwind and background PMio and PM2.5 conditions and to assess source attribution for the PM2 5 and PMio NAAQS in nonattainment areas. The IMPROVE network was started in 1987 as part of a federally-promulgated visibility plan and operated by the Department of the Interior (DOI) under the direction of a multi-agency federal/state steering committee. EPA expanded the original network in FY 1999 and FY 2000 from approximately 30 sites to 110 sites. The expanded network covers all of the Clean Air Act Class I areas where visibility is important (except the Bering Sea area which is impractical to monitor). EPA provides state/local air quality management STAG funds to the DOI to help maintain the IMPROVE network because of the importance of IMPROVE data to development of SIPs for both regional visibility and PM NAAQS attainment. The DOI and the other participant organizations contribute in excess of $3 million of their own funds or in-kind resources per year to support field operations and other monitoring at IMPROVE sites. For reasons of convenience and/or consistency of data, a number of state, local, and tribal monitoring organizations have historically chosen to ask the IMPROVE program to provide field technical support and laboratory services for additional sampling stations at locations under their control, using the IMPROVE protocols for sampler design, sampler operation, and laboratory analysis. Data from these additional "state/local IMPROVE protocol sites" (currently about 60) are managed and made public along with the data from the 110 sites in protected class I areas. These additional sites are provided as associated program support. This arrangement will continue in FY 2011. In addition, some federal agencies provide full funding for additional IMPROVE protocol sites to meet various program or research objectives. Tribal, state, local, and federal monitoring organizations may continue, discontinue, or add sites for the monitoring period which runs from April 1, 2011 through March 30, 2012. Once a monitoring organization has identified its source of funds for such sites, it may contact OAQPS (see below) to request monitoring support services and to begin arranging for the necessary funds transfer. Requests should be made as early in calendar year 2010 as possible, but no later than December 31, 2010. OAQPS is assuming that that monitoring organizations will retain all current state/local IMPROVE protocol sites in 2011. After extensive testing to ensure data comparability, the IMPROVE steering committee approved a change in carbon analysis methodology (both analyzer and protocol) to replace their 18-year old analyzer systems with new system for all samples collected starting in 2005. The IMPROVE steering committee also mandated the development and approved for use a revised algorithm for estimating light extinction from IMPROVE PM speciation data, that is expected to be used by most (perhaps all) states in their Regional Haze Rule SIPs. A revised (incorporating the latest data flags and edits) IMPROVE dataset required by the Regional Haze Rule for the 5- year baseline period (2000 to 2004) was disseminated through the IMPROVE and VIEWS (http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/views/). The Visibility Information Exchange Web System (VIEWS) is a database system and set of online tools originally designed to support the Regional Haze Rule. VIEWS provides easy online access to a wide variety of air quality data and provides online tools for exploring and analyzing these data. It also is used to facilitate the research and understanding of global air quality issues. For FY 2011, about $2.6 million of PM2.5 monitoring funds appropriated under §103 authority and about $1.2 million of state/local STAG funds appropriated under §105 authority Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-21 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring are being proposed to support visibility monitoring at 110 IMPROVE sites and 7 sites collocated with CASTNET. For more information on the IMPROVE program, contact Tim Hanley (919- 541-4417) or Laurie Trinca (919-541-0520) in OAQPS. Planning Information for Ambient Monitoring on Tribal Lands EPA respects each tribe's sovereign ability to identify its air quality goals and to make monitoring decisions it deems appropriate for its needs. This section addresses issues for consideration when conducting ambient air quality monitoring in the particular context of an EPA grant work plan. There are no Clean Air Act requirements for ambient monitoring on tribal lands, so tribes have flexibility in customizing ambient monitoring to address the many different situations they face in terms of air quality and other environmental concerns. Whatever the local situation, the purpose of any ambient monitoring should be to inform the public living in Indian country about the quality of the air where that quality is in doubt, to assist the tribe in managing its air quality, to help the tribe make the case that other governments or private parties need to control emissions due to their effect on air quality on tribal land, and/or to help track the effects of control actions to verify that they have addressed a problem. For some tribes ambient monitoring may or may not be a priority for funding compared to other air quality program or environmental program activities. If monitoring is conducted, a tribe's interests can be best served when the type of monitoring is appropriate for the specific situation. For a given tribe, some types of monitoring may be useful, while others may not be relevant. With limited resources available, strategic planning based on thoughtful priorities is needed. The EPA regional offices will be the principal EPA partners with tribes in this case-by- case planning. Over the last few years, EPA has emphasized that data from EPA-funded monitors on tribal lands should be available to both EPA and the general public through the AQS or other relevant national data system, once start-up issues are worked out and the data are reliable. EPA will continue to work with tribes on workable alternatives for data preparation and submission. In awarding grants to tribes with FY 2011 funds, regional offices are expected to make sure that tribes will have a way to get data submitted, including QA-related data. EPA has developed an Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy for State, Tribal and local Air Agencies that re-examines how the national ambient monitoring programs can be more thoughtfully directed towards their multiple purposes (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/monstratdoc.html)9. For the most part, this strategy addresses situations and considerations relevant to states, rather than considerations relevant to tribes. In FY 2008, EPA developed a document titled: Technical Guidance for the Development of Tribal Air Monitoring Programs (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/tl/memoranda/techguidancetribalattch.pdf) with the intent of providing tribes a better understanding of the ambient air monitoring process and to provide information on resources and tools to help build and sustain and air quality monitoring program. For 2011 and beyond, EPA may provide additional guidance specifically related to tribal air monitoring. Any new guidance will continue to provide flexibility for tribes and regional offices to address the many different air quality situations on tribal lands on a case-by-case prioritized ' The Ambient Air Monitoring Strategy was last updated in December of 2008. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-22 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring basis. See: http://www.epa.gov/oar/tribal/tatn.httnl for information on the progress in developing new guidance for tribal monitoring. Technical assistance in conducting ambient monitoring is provided to tribes through the Tribal Air Monitoring Support (TAMS) Center (http://www4.nau.edu/tams/). TAMS staff can provide more specific information on any of the types of monitoring described here. The remainder of this section provides general information that may assist tribes in clarifying their objectives for ambient monitoring and getting started on planning monitoring to meet those objectives. Air Toxics Monitoring: This may be the type of ambient monitoring of most interest to many tribes, because local sources potentially subject to tribal management can dominate exposures and because public perceptions of air toxic risks can be strong. As with all monitoring, the purpose of monitoring air toxics is to identify problems that merit action, plan what action will be effective, and track the effects of the action to verify it has addressed the problem. Interpreting air toxics monitoring data is not a simple task, since there are no bright legal lines between "acceptable" and "unacceptable" air quality, as there are for NAAQS pollutants. Interpretation can be more difficult or impossible if the monitoring location or the monitoring schedule is not appropriate for estimating risk to residents. Each regional office has specialists in risk assessment that can assist tribes in planning air toxics monitoring so that it is useful. See http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/airtoxics.htm for more information on air toxics from a tribal perspective. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/airtoxpg.html for information on monitoring of air toxics. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata for the 2002 National Scale National Air Toxics Assessment website10; the information and links on this website may be useful background when considering whether and what air toxics to monitor on a reservation, even if no 2002 assessment was possible for that reservation due to lack of an emissions inventory. Monitoring for NAAQS Pollutants using Federal Reference Methods (FRM) or Federal Equivalent Methods (FEM): This type of monitoring is primarily useful for determining on a formal basis whether air quality in a given location meets or does not meet a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), for example ozone, PM2.5, PMio, CO, 862, NO2 or lead. It takes three years of data collection to make this determination for most NAAQS. Establishing attainment status via FRM/FEM monitoring data can be important as it can affect the legal requirements that apply to sources at and around that location. It can also affect whether a tribe can pursue action to seek emission reductions from upwind sources beyond the tribal boundary. Monitoring for certain NAAQS pollutants may indicate a need to reduce emissions within the tribal boundary in order to protect public health of the residents, but in many cases it will be obvious from an understanding of emission-generating activities that local sources do not cause or contribute to concentrations near or above the NAAQS. 3 The 2002 NATA is the latest available as of June 2009. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-23 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring On October 17, 2006, EPA promulgated a rule which lowered the 24-hour PM2.s NAAQS from 65 to 35 micrograms per cubic meter. This change should be considered when planning tribal monitoring, because the more stringent standard is more likely to be violated as a result of local sources such as seasonal wood burning, wild fires, and prescribed burning than is the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA also revoked the annual PMio NAAQS everywhere (not the 24 hour PMio NAAQS). This change is expected to have no impact on tribes, as the annual standard was rarely violated anyway. PMio and PM2.5 sources on reservations (wood burning, fires, road and agricultural dust, etc.) could be a problem by themselves or on top of concentrations coming from upwind areas. In March 2008, EPA strengthened the ozone NAAQS by revising the 8-hour standard to a level of 0.075 ppm. At the time of finalizing the ozone NAAQS, EPA stated its intention to propose a separate rule to address changes to the ozone monitoring requirements that would be necessary to implement the revised ozone NAAQS. These may include proposed changes to the required ozone season, requirements for minimum monitors in smaller urban areas - where monitoring are not currently required, and requirements for non-urban areas such as sensitive ecosystems. As explained earlier no such requirements would exist for tribal nations. Despite monitoring regulations not being required of tribal nations, the potential for these changes are mentioned here so that they can be considered for implementation in tribal monitoring programs in 2011, if available at that time. The potential for ozone nonattainment, if it exists, is most likely due to upwind off-reservation sources. Tribal monitoring programs may have an interest in characterizing both ozone exposure of their population as well as characterizing sensitive ecosystems on their lands. In October 2008, EPA significantly strengthened the lead NAAQS from 1.5 |ig/m3 to 0.15 |ig/m3 as measured by total suspended particulate. With a substantially stronger NAAQS, regional offices and tribal monitoring agencies should work closely together to ensure that any sources of lead exposure on or immediately impacting tribal lands have been identified and appropriate steps are taken (ensuring the adequacy of the emission inventory and modeling impacts) to determine if ambient air monitoring is warranted. Before beginning any NAAQS monitoring, the regional office and tribe should consider: (1) whether attainment status can be determined with reasonable confidence in other ways (including passive monitors and other methods that do not qualify as Federal Reference methods but can be sufficient for unofficially showing that concentrations are well below the NAAQS), (2) how information on the attainment/nonattainment status once available could affect management of the tribal air program, and (3) how long the monitoring should continue if it does or does not show a NAAQS violation. Monitoring and use of data for NAAQS compliance purposes requires adherence to all applicable monitoring, quality assurance and reporting regulations. The EPA regional offices should work with the tribes to review the status and continued utility of any FRM monitors which have been operating long enough to have to have reasonably complete data. If attainment with a comfortable margin has been found and if there is no on- reservation or nearby development that is likely to change the situation substantially, it may be good to discontinue this type of monitoring in favor of other environmental management efforts. Continuous PMi.s Monitoring - There are several types and brands of monitors that provide estimates of PM2.5 concentrations on a continuous basis, without need for filters to be sent to a Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-24 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring laboratory for weighing. These are both less expensive to operate than a filter-based monitor and can give information on air quality that tribal officials and the public can use in real time to manage emission sources and personal activities. For a complete list of approved methods, see: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html. Continuous PM2.5 monitors with official status as a FEM can be used for purposes of comparing to the NAAQS. Passive Monitoring and Other Types of Screening Monitoring: A passive monitor is one which "soaks up" pollution rather than actively collecting it on a filter or pumping it through an on-site measurement device. This means they can be used where there is no electricity supply. Also, the monitoring unit is usually inexpensive, so it is possible to place them more closely together or over a much larger area than conventional powered monitors could possibly be placed. Passive monitors are not suitable for formal designation of an area as attainment or nonattainment but they can help a tribe understand the air quality situation on its reservation, for example, what part of a reservation has the worst air quality and whether any part has concentrations that approach health benchmarks. There are passive monitors available for a number of pollutants including several volatile organic air toxics including benzene, ozone, CO, and SO2. Time periods for exposing the monitor to the ambient (or indoor) air vary. The monitors must be collected each sampling period and sent to a laboratory for chemical analysis, so costs are not insignificant. Passive monitoring programs are usually of short duration because of the field labor and laboratory costs, compared to automated continuous analyzers. They have the advantage of requiring little up-front investment, however. EPA Region 6 has been in the forefront of applying passive monitoring to a variety of situations on and off reservations. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/passive.html for more information. Photochemical Assessment Monitoring: This is a very specialized type of monitoring related to the ozone NAAQS, in which air samples collected in the morning are taken to a laboratory for measurement of the concentrations of many individual hydrocarbon species including some toxic gases. This monitoring is only done during the ozone season. The purpose is to help identify the chemicals and sources contributing to ozone and the most efficient controls for reducing ozone concentrations. It is unlikely that this type of monitoring meets any distinct tribal need. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/pamsmain.html for more information. PM2.s Speciation Monitoring: This is a very specialized and expensive type of monitoring related to the PM2.5 NAAQS, in which filters collected over a 24-hour period are shipped by overnight express to a laboratory for measurement of various components of PM2.5 such as sulfate, nitrate, elemental carbon, organic carbon, and individual metals. This type of monitoring is done every third or every sixth day, year round. The purpose is to help identify the direct and precursor pollutants and sources contributing to PM2.5 and the most efficient controls for reducing PM2.5 concentrations. Most STN sites are in urban areas. This type of monitoring may meet a tribal need, if a PM2.5 nonattainment (or near nonattainment) situation is confirmed through simpler monitoring and its causes are not apparent, if high numbers of diesel engines operate in or upwind of the reservation, or if sources of toxics metals in PM2.5 form are known or suspected to be a health risk. However, if metals are a concern, it may be more appropriate to sample for metals in PMio form in order to capture all the PM that enters the human thorax and may affect health. Most air toxics monitoring programs sampling for toxic metals do so in form. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/speciepg.html for more information. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-25 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring IMPROVE Protocol Monitoring: IMPROVE stands for Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments. The IMPROVE program is described elsewhere in this Appendix or go to: http://vista.cira.colostate.edu/improve/ for more information. Over the last several years, about 10 tribes have applied for and received grant assistance from their EPA regional office to allow them to request the IMPROVE program to establish and provide technical services for an IMPROVE protocol sampling station on tribal land. Some tribal sites have operated for a period and then been discontinued. The grant funds needed to pay for this are awarded to the tribe by the EPA regional office, but transferred to the IMPROVE program through OAQPS. Once a tribal monitoring organization has been awarded funds for such sites, the tribe and/or the regional office may contact EPA to request monitoring support services and to begin arranging for the necessary funds transfer. Requests should be made as early in calendar year 2011 as possible, but no later than March 31 in order to start or continue monitoring on July 1. IMPROVE protocol monitoring is the generally accepted approach to quantifying visibility, and is the right approach if a tribe has a need for such quantification. EPA regional office staff can assist a tribe in understanding how such data could be used for official and unofficial purposes. Because the protocol quantifies carbonaceous material in PM2.5, IMPROVE protocol sampling may also be of interest if high numbers of diesel engines operate in or upwind of the reservation. IMPROVE monitors are not Federal Reference/Equivalent monitors, however, and cannot be used for designation purposes or to officially trigger a requirement for off-reservation sources to reduce their adverse impact on attainment within a reservation or other tribal land area. CASTNET Monitoring: CASTNET is a long-term monitoring network of more than 80 sites located primarily in rural areas. This network is designed to measure status and trends in deposition of particles, ozone, and other pollution emitted from facilities with tall stacks (generally power plants), mixed in the atmosphere, and transported over long distances. Ambient monitoring at CASTNET sites is supposed to reflect the overall effect of emissions from many sources, rather than any individual plant. While there is likely to be no direct use of such monitoring data in a tribe's own air quality program, a tribe may wish to host a CASTNET site in order to help advance the national air quality program. Tribes presently operate three sites. CASTNET is seeking to expand the number of sites in the western U.S. See: http://www.epa.gov/castnet for further information. National Atmospheric Deposition Program: The NADP program is run by the U.S. Geological Survey, and collects data on the chemistry of precipitation. NADP wet deposition sites are usually located such that there are no dominant nearby sources, which means that a site may not be of direct use of such monitoring data in a tribe's own air quality control program for sources on tribal land. However, a tribe may wish to host a NADP site in order to understand its air and water quality as impacted by near and distant sources, and/or to help advance the national air quality and water quality programs. A number of tribes currently are partners in this program and have sampling sites on their lands. See http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/ for more information. Mercury Monitoring: The NADP and several federal agencies including EPA are collaborating on a technical framework for a nationally coordinated network of speciated ambient mercury monitoring stations including both gas and parti culate forms of mercury. Data of this sort Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-26 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring eventually will be useful for calculating dry deposition and possibly for identifying the emission sources of mercury. Once technical, administrative, and data handling procedures are developed, tribes may wish to join this network. Tribes may also wish to participate in this development. It is anticipated that a high level of on-site expertise will be needed to successfully operate a mercury monitoring stations, even with centralized technical and QA support. More information is available at http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/mtn/. Smoke Monitoring: Tribes who use controlled or prescribed burning to manage forest or range land, or whose populations are frequently affected by fires may be interested in monitoring smoke concentrations either to help make decisions on when it is safe to burn, or to advise residents of when to take action to avoid smoke exposure. There are no formal procedures or standard techniques for such monitoring at this time, but portable monitors and satellite data communication devices have been tested and found to be practical by EPA and several governmental partners. NCore Multi-pollutant Monitoring: The NCore multi-pollutant monitoring network is a concept that will be turned into reality over the next year. Network plans for required NCore stations have been approved and stations should be fully operational by January 1, 2011. The network consists of approximately 80 sites which simultaneously measure a variety of gas and particle pollutants, using continuous methods to follow changes during a single day, across the seasons, and over many years. Most of these sites will be in urban areas and will be operated by state or local governments. However, about 20 sites will be in rural areas, including a tribal site which volunteered to host a rural site in order to gain a better understanding of its air quality and to help advance the national air quality program. See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ncore/index.html for more information. Program Support for Monitoring (National/Regional Monitoring Procurement Contracts) EPA makes procurement services available to state and local agencies, via national or regional contracts or interagency agreements, for a variety of support services and materials. These services can be conducted as either associated program support or as in-kind assistance. In providing associated program support, EPA works with regions, tribes, and state and local agencies in advance to identify needs on a national basis and targets funds for the support before determining the final Region-by-Region allocation of grant funds (i.e., pre-allotment). In contrast, in-kind assistance is agency-specific and the value of the service is included in the grant agreement of a state, tribe, or local agency after final agency-by-agency allotments are determined. This approach requires the recipient provide an appropriate amount of matching funds and meet other grant administrative obligations relative to the in-kind assistance. This occurs when contract support is requested by a grant recipient after its grant is awarded. Most support to monitoring programs is provided as associated program support, with the in-kind support being used to increase the level of support above planned levels if unexpected needs arise. Traditionally, OAQPS works with regions to determine the level of funds that each state or Tribe wants to allocate for the national procurement contracts. The services offered include assistance in monitoring site set-up and laboratory sample analysis for nonmethane organic compounds, urban air toxics, carbonyls, PAMS, and hazardous air pollutants; performance Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-27 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring evaluation (PE) sample support for agencies participating in NATTS; filters for PMio and Pb in the form of total suspended particulates; PM2 5 filters; laboratory services for PM2 5 speciation; IMPROVE monitoring services; and independent audits under the NPAP and PEP programs. Audits are usually provided via contracts managed by regional offices. Other services and materials are provided via contracts or interagency agreements managed by OAQPS. A new opportunity EPA wishes to make available to monitoring organizations is to obtain NADP technical support for speciated ambient mercury monitoring stations via EPA's interagency agreement with the U.S. Geological Survey, as associated program support or in- kind service. Organizations interested in this should contact Gary Lear of EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (lear.gary@epa.gov). Table C-5 lists categories and estimated funding amounts for associated program support not previously identified under specific monitoring topics: site support and laboratory analysis for air toxics and PAMS monitoring and filters for PMio. Typically final amounts to be set aside on a pre-allotment basis for the forthcoming fiscal year are identified after EPA and states conclude their grant negotiations in the preceding spring and summer. The amounts shown in Table A-5 are current best estimates. Final FY 2011 amounts will be based upon confirmed needs received from the regions and their state and local agencies by early in FY 2011. Table C-5. Preliminary FY 2011 National Procurement Contract Amounts (For Certain Categories of Associated Program Support) Preliminary FY 2011 Section 105 Contracts in Ambient Air Monitoring and Quality Assurance Program S/NMOC Sampling Sites (O3) PAMS QA Support (O3) Carbonyl Monitoring (03) UATMP Sites (Air Toxics) HAP Support (Air Toxics) All PMIOand Pb Filters1 Sub-total Region 1 $0 $38,368 $0 $0 $0 $3,765 $42,133 2 $0 $9,201 $34,866 $138,924 $0 $14,088 $197,079 3 $0 $12,268 $0 $0 $0 $24,042 $36,310 4 $0 $35,696 $0 $88,063 $0 $21,915 $145,674 5 $0 $87,584 $0 $59,705 $ $50,154 $197,443 6 $0 $9,201 $0 $0 $0 $16,381 $25,582 7 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $43,671 $43,671 8 $0 $0 $0 $120,538 $0 $25,459 $145,997 9 $0 $60,034 $0 $28,380 $0 $18,938 $107,352 10 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,383 $7,383 Totals $0 $252,352 $34,866 $435,610 $0 $225,796 $948,624 Note: Funds for PM10 and Pb filters are calculated based on Jan 2010 request for filters. See separate spreadsheet for details. (These STAG amounts are considered to be initial placeholders for FY 2011. The final level will depend upon a more definite indication of needs from recipients and will be adjusted accordingly. Adjustments will necessarily cause changes in the level of direct grant awards. Residual funds are always returned to regional offices for use in direct awards to recipients.) In general, funding that would otherwise go to specific agencies in the form of a direct award at the regional office level can be identified in advance for associated program support. In essence this reduces the direct award level to that agency. If associated program support costs identified for a specific agency are not used or are less than anticipated then these resources Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-28 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring would ostensibly be returned to that agency's allotment. However, for some associated program support common to all recipients, there is a fixed EPA cost which does not depend on the number of individual recipients. An example would be the PEP or NPAP programs for auditing monitoring stations, which have fixed costs to pay contractors to maintain measurement standards and keep standard operating procedures current. There may also be variable costs for the contractor labor and supplies to make monitoring station visits. For audits, therefore, changes in the number of audits within a Region will result in a refund of only the variable portion of the cost of the station visits (i.e., the associated program support). Another exception is that EPA considers the IMPROVE sites representing the Class I visibility protection areas to have benefits for all state air grant recipients because of interstate transport impacts and the responsibility of each state to protect visibility in every Class I area it impacts. Individual states (or regions) therefore cannot "unorder" these monitoring sites and receive back their operating costs. In contrast, the cost of supporting state/local IMPROVE protocol sites is "refundable" to a regional office. Centralized Site Support and Laboratory Analytical Services - The EPA will continue coordinating centralized laboratory analytical services to support air toxics, organic compounds, and PAMS programs in FY 2011 with those regional, state, and local agencies wishing to participate. Examples of services available via this national contract include those listed below. Speciated and Total Nonmethane Organic Compound Program (SNMOC/NMOC): The SNMOC/NMOC program has been operating since 1984. The EPA continues to support a centralized program for assistance to state and local agencies in the collection of NMOC, SNMOC, selected toxic compounds, and carbonyl compounds. This program was initiated to provide data for use in development of control strategies for ozone. As part of the SNMOC /NMOC program, participating sites are provided with all necessary sampling equipment, which they may co-locate with NOX monitors. The SNMOC/NMOC program consists of the following base components: • Base Site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training, problem solving, and final reporting; and • Canister sample analysis for 78 speciated NMOC or total NMOC. Options include: • Analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15); • Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A); and • Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a cost significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately. States collect the samples in canisters and/or cartridges and air freight them to Research Triangle Park, NC, for analysis. The samples are collected each week day from 6:00 to 9:00a.m. during the summer (typically June 1-September 30). In general, 96 samples are collected at each site over the study period. However, additional samples may be purchased. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-29 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring Urban Air Toxics Monitoring: To support emerging needs for information on levels of organic toxic species in ambient air, OAQPS initiated the Urban Air Toxics Monitoring Program (UATMP) in 1988. This program serves as an analytical/technical support program similar to the SNMOC/NMOC program. The major purpose of this program is to support state and local agency efforts to assess the nature and magnitude of various air toxics problems via collection of 24-hour integrated ambient air samples at six or twelve day sampling intervals, sample analysis in a central laboratory, data reporting to EPA's Air Quality System, and site-specific data analyses. This program continues to be highly successful, with excellent overall data capture and data quality that meets well-designed program goals. The UATMP consists of the following base components: • Base site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training, problem solving, and final reporting; • Canister sample analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15); and • Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A). Options include: • Canister sample analysis for 78 speciated NMOC; and • Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a cost that is significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately. Carbonyl Monitoring: Carbonyl sampling and analysis has been part of the monitoring support options that the Agency has provided since 1990. While carbonyl monitoring support can still be performed simultaneously with other program elements, the independent carbonyl option provides more flexibility for special studies and saturation monitoring programs. The Carbonyl Monitoring Program support consists of the following base components: • Base site support for sampling equipment preparation, installation and training, problem solving, and final reporting; and • Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A). PAMS and Toxics: PAMS support items will be available to include technical off-site and on-site support (initial equipment set-up, on-site technical assistance, consultation, problem solving, etc.); quality control (QC); and quality assurance (QA) program support (data validation, standards acquisition, and data management support). VOC canister, carbonyl compounds sample and concurrent toxics and speciated hydrocarbon analysis are also available. The PAMS and toxics technical support program consists of the following base components: • Technical site support; • QA/QC support; • Canister analysis support for PAMS compounds; • Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A); and • Concurrent analysis for both toxic and polar compounds and speciated NMOC at a cost that is significantly reduced compared to performing the two analyses separately. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-30 of 31 ------- Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring The PAMS automated analysis systems and/or multiple canister collection system purchase and installation are the responsibility of the participant. The amount of support an agency can order for the PAMS technical site support and QA/QC components of the program have been divided into smaller increments so that state, and local agencies can order the exact amount of support they require. Other Hazardous Air Pollutant Analysis: The national monitoring support programs have been expanded to provide for the measurement of additional HAPs to support the effective implementation of the CAA and address the needs of other special studies. Analytical services support is provided for samples containing specific HAPs, which are a subset of the 187 compounds listed in the CAA. Participants are responsible for providing all necessary sampling equipment. The analysis among categories is based upon the specific needs of the state or local agency. This support also will assist the states in implementing the new national ambient monitoring network. Some of the available options under this category include: • Canister sample analysis for 60 toxic and polar volatile organic compounds (TO-15); • Cartridge sample analysis for 14 carbonyl compounds (TO-11 A); • Metals (IO-3.5), hexavalent chromium (EPA Method), semivolatiles (EPA Method 8270C), PAHs (TO-13 A), etc. Air Toxics Performance Evaluation Sample Support: Agencies that are participating in the NATTS can receive PE samples on an annual basis. These can include VOCs, Carbonyls, SVOCs and metals on quartz filters. The PE samples shall be generated and analyzed by the national contractor and sent as "blind" samples to the participating agency. If an agency uses the national contractor for analysis, the agency will not be able to use the contractor for PE sample support. For more information on Centralized Site Support and Laboratory Analytical Services, contact Margaret Dougherty at 919-541-2344 (dougherty.margaret@epa.gov) or Michael Jones at 919-541-0528 (iones.mike@epa.gov) Particulate Matter Filters - OAQPS has historically purchased paniculate matter filters (for PMio monitoring, total suspended particulate sampling used for Pb and other metals monitoring and PM2 5 monitoring) through national contracts and distributed these to state and local agencies across the nation. The economies of scale from this type of centralized purchasing, centralized acceptance testing, and distribution of filters has produced lower costs than if state and local agencies each purchased these filters through their individual agencies. State and local agencies are responsible for providing information to the regions each year on the numbers and types of filters required prior to shipment. For PMio filters, monitoring agencies will need to specify whether the filters requested are to be used to support high-volume samplers (i.e., 8 in X 10 in quartz filters) or low-volume samplers (i.e., 46.2 mm Teflon filters). For information on filter purchases, contact David Lutz at 919-541-5476 lutz.david@epa.gov. Final Guidance May?, 2010 Appendix C-31 of 31 ------- Appendix D OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION 2010 PRIORITIES January 22, 2010 ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- TAKING ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE In 2010 OAR will advance the understanding of the science of climate change and more effectively communicate its impacts. We will apply the Clean Air Act regulatory authority to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in ways that meet our statutory obligations by applying common sense approaches that focus requirements on the largest GHG sources and use multi- pollutant, sector-based strategies. In combination with our on-going efforts to continually enhance and refocus our voluntary programs, these actions will encourage cost-effective, energy- efficient operating practices, promote the development and use of innovative technologies, grow green jobs, and most importantly, reduce air pollution that contributes to climate change. Through these efforts, EPA will reduce GHG emissions in ways that promote the President's vision of a clean energy future. Communicate the Science of Climate Change • Communicate the science underlying, and the impacts associated with, climate change, as a routine part of OAR regulatory and voluntary programs. • Explore other opportunities to communicate the science to the public, co-regulator partners, and stakeholders. Reduce GHG Emissions from Major Stationary Sources • Mandatory Reporting Rule (MRR): Implement the GHG emissions MRR, issued in September 2009, by providing training and outreach to affected sources, states and other stakeholders. • Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)/Title V GHG Tailoring Rule: Complete the PSD/Title V Tailoring Rule to assure major industrial sources address GHG emissions when being built or when undergoing major expansions or modifications. In conjunction with this rulemaking, EPA will issue guidance on the Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) for reducing GHG emissions from major industrial facilities that are covered by PSD requirements. • New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Key Industrial Sectors: Consider opportunities to reduce GHGs through NSPS for selected categories of large industrial facilities, including: cement manufacturing, nitric acid manufacturing, petroleum refining, oil and gas production, and utilities. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 1 of 6 ------- Appendix D • Utility Strategy: Work with states, electric utility companies, environmental organizations and other stakeholders to complete the Utility Strategy for reducing traditional air pollutants, as well as GHG emissions, to transition to a cleaner and more energy-efficient power sector that provides affordable and reliable electricity. The Strategy, which will include replacements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR), will provide utility companies with a clear road map of likely future emission limits for planning purposes. Reduce GHG Emissions from Vehicles and Fuels • Vehicle GHG Rule: Establish the first-ever emission standards for GHGs from all new passenger vehicles beginning in the 2012 model year. This rule will be jointly issued with the Department of Transportation, which is setting complementary CAFE standards for the same vehicles. The rule is expected to be completed by the end of March 2010 and follows EPA's issuance of a positive endangerment finding in December 2009. • Renewable Fuels Standards (RFS2) Rule: Complete in early 2010 the RFS2 rule called for by the Energy Security and Independence Act of 2007, which will lead to the use of increasing volumes of renewable fuels in the transportation sector reaching 36 billion gallons by 2022. The regulations include methodologies for determining the life cycle GHG emissions for renewable fuels, thereby assuring these fuels will have fewer life cycle emissions that the petroleum fuels they replace. • E-15 Decision: Make the final decision in mid-summer on the petition by Growth Energy that seeks a waiver under the Clean Air Act to allow ethanol to be blended into gasoline at levels above the current 10 percent limit (i.e., 15 percent or E-15). If the waiver is granted, promulgate, shortly thereafter, regulations establishing fuel pump labeling requirements to assure consumers use the proper fuel in their vehicles and equipment. • Fuel Economy Labeling Rule: In late spring 2010, propose options for revising the fuel economy labels on windows of all new cars and light trucks sold in the US to take account of new vehicle technologies, such as electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, all-electric vehicles, etc., and the unique challenges they pose for consumers in terms of comparing relative energy consumption per mile of travel. • GHG Rule for Heavy Duty Trucks and Buses: Propose the first-ever GHG standards for large trucks and buses in 2010. Use Partnerships to Reduce GHGs • ENERGY STAR Program: Enhance ENERGY STAR by implementing the new Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy and promoting the Home Performance for ENERGY STAR Program. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 2 of 6 ------- Appendix D • SmartWay Program: Implement improved supply chain-based carbon assessment and tracking tools and complementary partnership solutions to achieve GHG reductions across a broad range of the global goods movement. • Methane to Markets (M2M) Program: Support and enhance M2M as one of our most successful international efforts to reduce methane emissions. • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs): Work with the Department of State to phase out the use of stratospheric ozone-depleting HFCs under the auspices of the Montreal Protocol. • Support International Climate Change Mitigation: Support Administration efforts to build capacity among developing countries to measure, report, and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and to promote market-based approaches. ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- IMPROVING AIR QUALITY In 2010 OAR will complete a number of rulemakings to meet our legal obligations and to implement the Clean Air Act in a more timely way. We will improve our compliance programs and coordinate with OECA on air enforcement matters. We will also take steps to improve the effectiveness of our indoor air programs and our international clean air efforts. These efforts will be undertaken in ways that maximize opportunities to work for environmental justice and build partnerships with states, tribes and EPA Regional Offices. In Addition to Other Rulemaking, Complete the Following Regulatory Actions Scheduled for 2010: National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) • Issue revised NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and ozone. • Propose rules for carbon monoxide and particulate matter (PM) NAAQS. The proposal for PM is based on an accelerated review of the PM NAAQS in response to the Administrator's concern about the PM NAAQS set in 2006. • Establish new requirements for ambient air monitoring for the lead (Pb) NAAQS. Emissions Standards for Stationary and Mobile Sources • Propose Clean Air Transport Rule to replace the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). • Set final standards for emissions of toxic air pollutants (under MACT) and propose new source performance standards (NSPS) for Portland Cement. • Propose and issue final rule for Industrial, Commercial and Institutional Boilers MACT and area source standards. • Propose and issue final standards for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators. • Set final standards under NSPS for flares and process heaters at petroleum refineries. • Undertake multiple Residual Risk and Technology Reviews for toxic air pollutants. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 3 of 6 ------- Appendix D • Issue for public review and comment an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on reducing lead emissions from the general aviation sector. Elevate the Importance of Indoor Air Quality • Collaborate with the Office of Children's Health Protection, CDC and HUD to improve our programs that address indoor air quality. • Radon: Enhance the outreach, visibility and effectiveness of our programs to reduce exposure to radon gas. • ENERGY STAR: Support ENERGY STAR in efforts to ensure healthy building efficiency efforts, as well as partner with OPPTS and OSWER to address common challenges. • Cookstoves: Develop domestic and international partnerships to enhance our efforts to encourage the manufacture and use of cleaner cookstoves. Enhance OAR's International Clean Air Efforts • Develop strategic partnerships to (1) protect US air quality, (2) assist developing nations' capacity building to reduce air pollution, and (3) promote related US national interests. Protect the Public from Environmental Radiation • Characterize radiation risk and update standards to ensure public health protection. • Prepare for and respond to radiological emergencies. ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- EXPANDING THE CONVERSATION ON ENVIRONMENTALISM AND WORKING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Consistent with the Administrator's focus on environmental justice, OAR will not only consider environmental justice in its future rulemakings, we will work with OECA and OGC to focus attention on sectors that emit multiple pollutants and on activities that can result in significant emissions of air pollutants and pose significant air quality concerns to local communities. • Multi-Pollutant Air Quality Planning: Expand the use of risk-based, multi-pollutant modeling as recently piloted in Detroit and develop other models that allow state, tribal and local governments to develop more comprehensive State Implementation Plans that address multiple pollutants in an integrated way. Such plans have potential to achieve greater health benefits more cost-effectively and address significant population risks, which is especially important in traditionally underserved low income and minority communities. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 4 of 6 ------- Appendix D • Air Monitors: Encourage and expand the placement of existing or new air monitors in low income and minority communities that may be in close proximity to major sources of air pollution. • School Air Toxics: Continue the Administrator's 2009 initiative to monitor toxic air pollutants at selected schools around the country. Analysis of the results will be completed in late summer. • Leaks, Flares, and Malfunction Emissions: Focus rulemaking on the significant emissions in and around low income and minority communities that come from unregulated or under-regulated industrial flares, leaking equipment, open fugitive sources, and malfunction emissions. Reductions in emissions from these sources will help ozone nonattainment areas, reduce emissions of air toxics, enhance our climate change efforts, and result in additional controls at these sources to reduce impacts on low income and minority communities. • Clean Diesel Grants: Successfully award grants under ARRA/DERA authority to reduce PM, NOx and VOCs from the existing diesel fleet across the country with emphasis in and around low income and minority communities. • Goods Movement: Work with the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council and EPA Regional Offices to address the serious public health concerns associated with freight distribution across the U.S, using our National Clean Diesel Campaign and SmartWay Program tools to cut air pollution through the entire system of transportation facilities, seaports, airports, railways, truck lanes, and border facilities. ADMINISTRATOR PRIORITY- BUILDING STRONG STATE AND TRIBAL PARTNERSHIPS A significant amount of air quality and climate work has been or will be delegated to the EPA Regional Offices, states and tribes, and they need assistance in addressing that workload. As a result of resource constraints, OAR program offices have not completed all of the necessary guidance documents and regulations to allow the Regions, states and tribes to keep pace with all their implementation efforts. To address this issue, OAR will explore a number of efforts. • Enhance OAR's Ability to Provide Needed and Timely Guidance: Review the priorities that the Regions provided to OAR in 2009 and prepare guidance that Regions can use to support State and Tribal efforts to improve the effectiveness of SIPs and emission control programs. As part of this effort, ask States, Tribes and other stakeholders for their suggestions on guidance that EPA should be providing in support of our regulatory programs. • Improve Processes; Reduce Administrative Burdens: Work with the Regional Offices and states to streamline the existing air workload, using the LEAN process or other tools. Focus on improvements to the SIP process and explore other areas, such as the Title V Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 5 of 6 ------- Appendix D petitions process, and opportunities to transition to a comprehensive, multi-pollutant approach. Additional OAR Priorities Clean Air Act 40th Anniversary: EPA will co-sponsor a conference with the Bipartisan Policy Center in September on the 40th anniversary of the 1970 Clean Air Act highlighting public health improvements, technology advancements and remaining air quality challenges, including climate and other energy-related issues. The conference will also feature a technology exhibition to showcase major innovations and cutting-edge developments in air quality and energy efficiency. Refocus Resources Provided to OAR Voluntary Programs: Between OAR headquarters and Regional Offices, significant resources are provided to support a wide variety of voluntary programs. Given the changes in regulatory direction and increasing demands upon headquarters and the Regions, we will examine our current programs and target our resources to ensure that we are maximizing environmental results. Ensure our Laboratories and Office Space keep pace with the Mission of the Agency: We will strive to upgrade the capabilities of our laboratories with advanced technology equipment and training opportunities for OAR personnel. We will partner with other program offices and the Regional Offices to increase the energy efficiency of our office and laboratory facilities and implement the requirements of Executive Order 13514. Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix D - Page 6 of 6 ------- Appendix E - Key Changes from FY 2010 Office of Air & Radiation Appendix E Change from FY 2010 Guidance Document Reason for Change Effected Pages and Sections Priorities Children's health, environmental justice, use of Environmental Exchange Network are included as new cross-agency agency priorities Changes in NAAQS implementation priorities and ambient air monitoring. Work related to greenhouse gases is a new priority Climate Protection chapter includes all OAR climate- related activities; previously included only voluntary program activities. Administrator and Assistant Administrator priorities Changes driven by normal sequence of events and timelines related to revisions to NAAQS. Administrator and Assistant Administrator priorities Present climate-related activities in one location Executive Summary, Healthier Outdoor Air chapter, Indoor Environments chapter Executive Summary, Healthier Outdoor Air chapter, Appendix C, Appendix D Executive Summary and Climate Protection chapter Climate Protection chapter Funding The President's FY 2011 budget request includes a total of $390.72 million in STAG funds for outdoor and indoor air grant programs carried out by multi-state, state, local, tribal agencies, and other eligible entities. A total of $309.08 million of this amount is targeted for continuing air programs carried out by state and local air agencies. This is a significant increase of $85 million over the FY2009 level and $82.5 million over the FY2010 enacted level. Funding authority for the PlVb.s ambient monitoring program is proposed for transition over a multi-year period beginning n FY 2011. EPA is requesting a significant increase in STAG funds to assist states, local agencies, and tribes with expanded core, as well as new, program responsibilities. These include: the development and implementation of plans to address revised, NAAQS; ambient air monitoring provisions related to new NAAQS; enhanced capacity for agencies with approved or delegated responsibility for permitting large sources of GHGs; and the continued characterization of air toxics problems and implementation of measures to reduce their risks. Executive Summary Healthier Outdoor Air chapter Appendices B and C Strategies None None None Annual Commitment Measures Deleted OAQPS N12a, OAQPS N34, OAQPS M21, OAQPS M23, OAQPS P07, OAQPS P08a, OAQPS P08b, OAQPS T07, ORIA RAD 3, ORIA SIRG 4. Added OAQPS P20, OAQPS P21, ORIA IAQ 7, OAP 7, and OAP 8. Measures were deleted because the activity being monitored has been completed or superseded, or because HQ and Regions agreed that ACS reporting on the item was no longer necessary. Added measures to capture new program activities or to replace inferior measures that were deleted. Appendix A Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix E - Page 1 of 2 ------- Appendix E Change from FY 2010 Guidance Document Tracking Process Contacts Changed the following from non-commitment indicators to measures: OAQPS N07, N08, N09, N10, N11, N29, N32, N33; GAP 1. None New contacts for questions about indoor environments, climate change, stratospheric ozone, and radiation. Reason for Change To minimize the number of non-commitment indicators with targets. None Staff changes Effected Pages and Sections None Appendix F Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix E - Page 2 of 2 ------- Appendix F Program Contacts Criteria Pollutants, Air Toxics, Multi-pollutant Planning, and Regional Haze: Jeff Whitlow, phone 919-541-5523, email whitlow.j eff@epa.gov Trading Programs: Doris Price, phone 202-343-9067, email price.doris@epa.gov or Larry Kertcher, phone 202-343-9121, email kertcher.larrv@epa.gov Mobile Sources: Courtney McCubbin, phone 202-564-2436, email mccubin.courtney@epa.gov State and Local Air Grants: Bill Houck, phone 202-564-1349, email houck.william@epa.gov unless a specific contact is listed in the guidance document. Tribal: Barrel Harmon, phone 202-564-7416, email harmon.darrel@epa.gov Indoor Environments: David Rowson, phone 202-343-9449, email rowson.david@epa.gov Radiation: Jonathan Edwards, phone 202-343-9437, email edwards.jonathan@epa.gov Stratospheric Ozone: Kristinn Vazquez, phone 202-343-9062, email vazquez.kristinn@epa.gov Climate Change: GHG reporting rule: Bill Irving, phone 202-343-9065, email irving.bill@epa.gov, ENERGY STAR and related voluntary energy efficiency programs: Karen Schneider, 202-343-9752, email schneider@epa.gov, mobile source programs: Courtney McCubbin, phone 202-564-2436, email mccubin.courtney@epa.gov General Questions: Mike Hadrick, phone 202-564-7414, email hadrick.michael@epa.gov ++ End ++ Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix F - 1 of 1 ------- Draft Work Plan for Environmental Justice Draft 2-17-10 WORK PLAN OVERVIEW GOAL 1: ENGAGE COMMUNITIES IN EPA DECISIONMAKING: ENLIST OUR PARTNERS TO MEET COMMUNITY NEEDS Goal Description: "Open the Doors" of EPA to communities of color, Native Americans, the poor, and other historically underrepresented and actively engage community groups, other federal agencies, states, local governments, and tribal governments to recognize, support and advance environmental protection and public health for vulnerable communities. Objective 1: Actively engage and increase the effectiveness of the Agency's Federal Advisory Committees (FACAs) in providing advice to Agency decision-makers on issues that are important to Environmental Justice groups and communities. Objective 2: "Open the Doors of EPA" by giving community groups access to Agency officials to discuss problems that arise at sites or facilities EPA is involved with, and to provide communities with an opportunity to be heard and to suggest solutions to environmental problems for which EPA is a decision-maker. Objective 3: Engage other federal agencies to recognize, support and advance EJ goals, by engaging them in discussion and seeking their commitment to work with us to address site- specific EJ issues in which they are involved and general issues within their jurisdiction Objective 4: Encourage and support state partners to recognize and address EJ issues that arise in federal environmental programs implemented by states. Objective 5: Respond promptly to Title VI complaints and clean out backlog. GOAL 2: SUPPORT COMMUNITY EFFORTS TO BUILD HEALTHY, SUSTAINABLE AND GREEN NEIGHBORHOODS Goal Description: Empower vulnerable communities to protect themselves from environmental harms and to build healthy and sustainable neighborhoods that enable disadvantaged groups to participate in the New Green Economy. Objective 1: Provide EPA community grants to foster healthy and sustainable communities Objective 2: Promote and support green development in vulnerable communities Objective 3: Regional Initiatives to promote EJ goals and support community capacity building Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix G - 1 of 2 ------- Appendix G GOAL 3: APPLY ERA'S REGULATORY TOOLS TO PROMOTE AND ADVANCE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Goal Description: Incorporate environmental justice considerations in EPA's regulatory and policy decisions by building a strong science and legal foundation and engaging the public in EPA's decision-making processes. Objective 1: Incorporate EJ considerations into EPA's rulemaking process Objective 2: Strengthen science of disproportionate impact and cumulative risk analysis Objective 3: Clarify legal authorities to address EJ concerns Objective 4: Incorporate EJ Considerations into Permitting Guidance and Decisions Objective 5: Incorporate EJ Considerations into NEPA Reviews Objective 6: Incorporate EJ Considerations into enforcement targeting Objective 7: High visibility agency-wide EJ initiative by all NPMs targeting important problems using all regulatory tools including permitting, cleanup and enforcement GOAL 4: STRENGTHEN INTERNAL EPA MECHANISMS TO INTEGRATE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Goal Description: Integrate environmental justice in all Agency programs, policies and activities by strengthening communications and training, instituting management and accountability measures, and fostering a diverse workforce Objective 1: Develop a Communications Strategy (Internal and External) Objective 2: Clarify Organizational Responsibilities among HQ and Regional offices Objective 3: Incorporate EJ into NPM Guidance Objective 4: Assure that Budget and personnel support is available Objective 5: Develop metrics for all Actions to hold ourselves accountable for the work Objective 6: Foster a diverse workforce at EPA April 30, 2010 Appendix G -2 of 2 Final Guidance May 7, 2010 Appendix G -2 of 2 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Office of Air and Radiation Responses to Comments Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in I Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Issue Area: Executive Summary 1. Our agencies were represented at the referenced meeting between OAR and National Association of Clean Air Agencies and are aware of the topics discussed. However, we do not know how EPA intends to address suggestions made in that meeting. To the extent that EPA's ultimate responses have impacts on local and state air agencies and their programs, the agencies should have an opportunity to review the responses before this grant guidance is finalized. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 1 As a follow-up to the February 4, 2010 meeting between senior EPA managers and representatives of NACAA, we identified EPA and state and local representatives to lead workgroup efforts on major issues. The workgroups will communicate progress and results to partners and stakeholders. None required. 2. We concur with the multipollutant planning priority under "State, Local, and Tribal Planning." We appreciate the commitment of Region 4 and OAQPS in recent months to examine more efficient and effective ways to conduct air quality planning. We encourage EPA to fully recognize and support the desires of local and state agencies to conduct consolidated multi- pollutant regional planning. At the same time, EPA should allow flexibility to agencies to determine the best combinations of pollutants that will deliver efficient and effective air Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 3 An EPA workgroup composed of HQ and regional representatives worked diligently and thoughtfully over a 2- year period to develop a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the CAA's major considerations of the population affected, the extent and severity of air pollution problems, and financial need. The workgroup also developed principles to guide the development and implementation of the methodology. These included relevance, equity, and transparency. EPA believes that it has applied the principles to the methodology in a manner that results in an equitable and strategic allocation across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input received from state and local agencies and multi-jurisdictional organizations during the process. EPA will continue to consult with stakeholders during the implementation, and any subsequent update, of the None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 1 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder quality improvements. 3. Under the Executive Summary section's Cross-Agency Priorities, the OAR Guidance states that "[Children's environmental health should be an intrinsic part of decision-making at every level of the Agency" (see page 4). This is a view shared by Indian Tribes as a whole which value their youth as a link to the past, present and future. Unfortunately, it appears from the language of this section that the EPA will be working closely with states on children's environmental health issues while excluding Tribes from the conversation. As an example, one of the actions called for on behalf of the regions in FY 201 1 is to sponsor "joint meetings with counterparts in state environmental departments and health departments to facilitate coordinated actions to better protect children's environmental health" (see page 5). It flies in the face of reason as to why Indian Tribes wouldn't be involved in such conversations or why the Agency has failed to acknowledge them as integral and sovereign partners in EPA's goal of protecting children from environmental health hazards. The NTAA therefore recommends that Indian Tribes be included alongside states as the types of jurisdictions Commenter (s) National Tribal Air Association Location in Draft Guidance p. 4 NPM Response allocation scheme. EPA agrees. We intend to fully involve tribes in programs addressing children's issues. Action Taken in Final Guidance Tribes added. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-2 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance which the Agency needs to actively engage with regarding children's environmental health. 4. "Also, work with HQ and state and local agencies to expand community- based air toxics monitoring, particularly in communities disproportionately impacted by air pollution." Comment: It is Virginia's understanding that the community- based air toxics funds were taken to fund the Lead Monitoring /NAAQS and the School Air Toxics (SAT) program. Is it EPA's intention to fully fund the Lead efforts, SAT and the community- based monitoring effort? What criteria will be used to determine "communities disproportionately impacted"? Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 5 EPA intends to provide funding for the lead monitoring equipment with FY09 and FY10 funds redirected from the Community Scale Air Toxics program. The Community Scale Air Toxics program will resume in FY11 and is discussed in Appendix C. Our intent is to review grant proposals submitted as part of CSM program and take into consideration projects where the community presents a case for being "disproportionately impacted". None required. 5. "For air toxics, OECA will focus on excess emissions caused by facilities' failure to comply with leak detection and repair requirements and restrictions on flaring, and to address excess emissions during start-up, shutdown, and malfunction events." Comment: It appears that this refers to a national enforcement initiative for LDAR applicable facilities. There are a large number of these facilities. Does OECA intend to enlist the states in this Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 4 We (OECA) strive to work with our state counterparts in al our enforcement work, and are encouraging state participation in this initiative. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 AppendixH-3 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder effort? 6. NAAQS - Priorities for ROs - Ozone, Lead, PM, and Regional Haze: "... assist in designating areas for the revised lead and ozone standards, . . . ." 7. We are not clear on why OAR sees the need to single out Houston, TX and Port Arthur, TX in the guidance to highlight local impacts. Furthermore, Region 6 is concerned that OAR did not share their analysis that supports this statement. 8. The National Radiation priority for Regions only addresses states. See also page 60, especially the last bullet. Working with tribes should also be a priority - uranium for example. 9. Children's Health: The last sentence should be revised to include tribes. This is an important issue for tribes. As an example, several tribes in Tar Creek area conducted blood lead testing to determine risk/impact to children. The Tribal Science Council has focused on this issue and should be considered a resource to work with EPA as well as individual tribes. 10. Should include tribal environmental departments. 1 1 . Suggested revisions to text: Commenter (s) Region 6 Region 6 Region 6 Region 6 Region 6 Region 5 Location in Draft Guidance p. 2 p. 3 p. 3 p. 4, first paragraph p. 5, fourth bullet p. 6 NPM Response Agree. Nearly identical appears on pages 16-17 of EPA's FY 201 1 Congressional Justification budget. However, we will delete the city names from the guidance. Agree. Agree. Agree. OAR has incorporated the revised language into the Great Action Taken in Final Guidance Ozone added. City names deleted. Tribes added. Tribes added. Tribes added. Revised. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H -4 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder The Great Lakes Air Deposition (GLAD) program is coordinated by the Great Lakes Commission was established to address the deposition of toxic pollutants and to promote coordinate efforts to reduce such deposition and the resulting adverse impacts on human and wildlife health in the Great Lakes region. ... In FY201 1, it is expected that many states will continue to address mercury- impaired waters with implementation of their TMDLs as their desired outcome. For more information on the program, please contact Erin Newman in Region 5(312-886-4587). 12. The Agency requested more STAG funds for tribes as well as for state and local agencies. This should be acknowledged even through the amount of the increase for tribes was not nearly as significant. Commenter (s) Region 6 Location in Draft Guidance p. 8, first sentence of last STAG paragraph NPM Response Lakes section. Additional language has been added to acknowledge not only the modest Tribal air increase but also requests for significant increases in existing and new Tribal grant programs under which air activity is eligible. Action Taken in Final Guidance Revised. Issue Area: Clean Air Allowance Trading Programs 1. The draft calls for Section 105 funds to be used for the CAIR Seasonal NOx Trading Program. We believe EPA should fund the administration of the program in the same way that the agency funds administration of the Acid Rain program - through EPA's budget. In other words, the cost for NACAA p.ll The Seasonal NOx Program under CAIR is not an independent federal program administered on behalf of the states by EPA, like the Acid Rain Program. It is a state program established to enable 25 affected states and the District of Columbia meet the obligations of their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for controlling transported ozone. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H -5 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance administering CAIR's seasonal and annual trading programs should be absorbed by EPA's budget, not Section 105 grants. 2. As EPA moves forward with regulatory actions to control utility emissions, there will be opportunities for EPA to strategize with its local/state agency partners. There are many important decisions to make regarding various pollutants. The value of an integrated and coordinated approach is substantial, both to the regulated community and to the implementing agencies. We encourage EPA to design a mechanism that will allow co- regulators to participate in the development of utility emission reduction strategies. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 10 EPA concurs that the implementation of regulatory actions to reduce air pollutant emissions benefits from the involvement of local/state agency partners as well as the regulated community and other stakeholders during the formative stages of this process. EPA encourages its local/state partners to recommend specific participatory mechanisms to facilitate the development of an integrated multi-pollutant approach based on their experiences in working with co-regulators who have similar environmental goals but differing authorities and jurisdictions. None required. 3. Table 1 outlines funding contributions required of EPA regions and respective states for the CAIR Seasonal NOx Trading Program. While we cannot disagree with the logic that the cost of the trading program is determined by the number of sources that have to be tracked in the system, we respectfully object to this funding being taken from the agency grant funds. We have expressed concern to EPA in the past about this practice. We suggest that EPA's own budget should Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 13 The Seasonal NOx Program under CAIR is not an independent federal program administered on behalf of the states by EPA, like the Acid Rain Program. It is a state program established to enable 25 affected states and the District of Columbia meet the obligations of their State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for controlling transported ozone. EPA plans to reassess the current method for determining appropriate regional and state contributions to program operations contract costs when finalizing a replacement Transport Rule. EPA will evaluate this workload allocation issue that has been raised by the southeastern agencies as well as other comments and program factors during the None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-6 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance support such programs mandated by its own regulatory efforts. If funding is not allocated from the EPA budget, please be aware that the southeastern agencies are being assessed an off-the- top grant obligation of 28.7%, proportional to the number of southeastern sources subject to the trading program. At the same time, grant allocations to the Region 4 agencies are not based on such work load realities and obligations and we only receive about 12% of the national Section 105 allocation. As we comment elsewhere, such disparities and disproportionate allocations and assessments need to be resolved so that we can effectively meet future obligations for funding the NOx trading program if no alternatives exist. reassessment. Issue Area: Federal Support for Air Quality Management 1. We recommend that the priorities for regional offices in FY 2011 include addressing the backlog of SIP submittals and exceptional events submissions. National Association of Clean Air Agencies p. 22 EPA is committed to processing SIP submittals and exceptional events submissions, and intends to take steps to reduce the SIP backlog. There are some instances where EPA cannot take action on SIPs and exceptional events submissions due to ongoing litigation and the development of additional policy and guidance as a result of past litigation. None required. 2. "The air toxics program includes non-financial support to state, tribal, and local air pollution control agencies for: modeling, inventories, monitoring, assessments, strategy and program Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 19 The non-financial support includes all support EPA offers to state, local, and tribal agencies outside of direct grant support. The non-financial support includes training, and support in completing technical tasks (emission inventories, monitoring, and modeling). EPA HQ and regional offices work closely None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H -7 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder development; community-based toxics programs;" Comment: It is unclear as to what is being referred to here. What is the non- financial support for emissions inventories for toxics? The Assessments referred to here must be risk assessments. Is the non-financial support development of residual risk standards? Program development? 3. "In FY 20 10, EPA finalized rulemaking for the NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and plans to finalize rulemaking for ozone in August 2010. EPA plans to place greater emphasis on integrating across OAR programs, specifically as it relates to energy issues and air quality planning. EPA will provide opportunities for greater collaboration with states, tribes and other federal agencies in addressing these air quality problems and continued emphasis on innovative strategies to improve air quality." Comment: This description needs a little clarification. How does the final rulemaking for NO2 and ozone lead to a greater emphasis on energy issues and planning which then leads to greater collaboration on air quality problems? Please explain. Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 19 NPM Response with state, local, and tribal agencies to ensure the air toxics program is implemented effectively. Many issues related to the NAAQS for NO2 and ozone cannot be traced to a particular type of emission (stationary or mobile). OAR intends to ensure that strategies for reducing ambient concentrations of NO2 and ozone encompass the wide variety of contributors. Effective control strategies will have to address both stationary and mobile sources to ensure attainment of these more stringent standards. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 AppendixH-8 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder 4. "Provide technical and policy guidance to regions on implementing the lead, NO2, and SO2 NAAQS." Comment: Headquarters should provide guidance on the impact of the new source -oriented aspects of the new NAAQS standards. The new standards are forcing changes and expansions to the existing ambient network in most states based on having to place monitors in a manner that is single source (or source category) influenced. This philosophical shift in the expectations of the ambient monitoring network has potential implications for the programs that impact stationary sources such as permitting programs. This change in approach to the expectations for ambient monitors needs to be articulated and evaluated as far as its cross-program impacts. 5 . "Work with partners to improve the technical specifications and procedures for the National Air Toxics Trends Stations (NATTS) ambient monitoring network, to support short-duration local-scale (also known as community- scale) monitoring studies, and to develop improved emission factors." Comment: The intersection of the NATTS program with Community Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 21 p. 25 NPM Response Implementation guidance will be provided. This paragraph will be corrected. The intention is that EPA will work with partners to: (1) improve the technical specifications and procedures for the NATTS; (2) support the community-scale program; and (3) develop improved emission factors. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Paragraph rewritten. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 AppendixH-9 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance based monitoring needs explanation. It is not clear how improved technical specifications for the NATTS program supports short term programs like the Community based projects. Also, how are emissions factors generated from ambient data? 6. "Continue to develop and improve risk assessments and management methodologies." Comment: Please work on developing standardized approaches to Risk Assessments from air monitoring data. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 26 EPA has developed an air toxics risk assessment (ATRA) reference library for conducting air toxics analyses at local facilities and in communities. This library provides information on the fundamental principles of risk-based assessment for air toxics and how to apply those principles in different settings as well as strategies for reducing risk at the local level. In addition to periodically updating this library, EPA presents its risks characterization to the Science Advisory Board (SAB) for further input and refinement. We recently presented our risk assessment methodology for our residual risk program to the SAB and are awaiting final feedback from the panel. None required. 7. "Work with states, tribes, and local governments to: 1) implement a residual risk program, and 2) assess and address the combined impact of multiple sources of air toxics, encouraging voluntary reductions of air toxics from indoor and outdoor sources." Comment: How does EPA intend to implement a residual risk program independent of a Risk Assessment policy? "Assess and address" is vague Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 27 EPA recently reviewed its residual risk approach with the Science Advisory Board (SAB). The SAB suggested that EPA evaluate risks in "broader context of aggregate and cumulative risks...." To address this concern, EPA will consider other risks in addition to the subject source category when evaluating these risks. Existing tools, such as the National Air Toxic Assessment (NATA), will help EPA identify and quantify these external risks. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-10 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder relative to some measure of the combined impact of multiple sources. The first step will be determining how to identify multiple contributing sources to an air toxics issue. Over all this priority is difficult to understand. 8. "Conduct a grant competition for community-scale air toxics ambient monitoring projects. Provide guidance to regions for negotiating individual grants to ensure that data meet risk screening, risk characterization, and/or risk assessment requirements where appropriate given study objectives that were material in selecting the project for funding." Comment: Any such guidance should be provided to the states to assist in putting together grant requests. Also the expectations for stakeholder involvement need to be clearly articulated. 9. Under Regions, it is stated "implement section 1 1 1,112, and 129 standards, including lll(d), 129 plans, in areas where states do not." This should be a joint priority under both Headquarters and Regions as the Regions do not have the necessary resources to implement these programs without assistance form OAQPS and Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Region 4 Location in Draft Guidance p. 28 p. 26-27 NPM Response The request for grant proposals will clearly identify the program objectives, requirements and selection/evaluation criteria for eligibility, including risk screening, risk characterization, and/or risk assessment. Agree. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Change made to include cooperation with HQ. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-11 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder OECA. This is also giving the states the impression that they do not need to take on these programs, as EPA will fill the gap when in reality we may not be able to accommodate. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Issue Area: State and Local Air Quality Management 1 . "Target significant resources to recipients to develop, refine, and maintain monitoring systems and emission inventories which help provide a clear picture of the nature and sources of air pollution and help gauge the impacts of preventive and mitigative measures employed; ..." Comment: This process should include guidance on the use of ambient monitoring systems as a means of identifying specific sources of air pollution. The NAAQS standards currently under development include a shift to source specific approaches to ambient monitoring and clearly anticipate that ambient systems will be included in developing compliance histories for facilities that impact the source oriented monitors. The use of the data generated from these source oriented network for NAAQS compliance determination and source- specific compliance determinations needs to be made clear. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 30 Implementation guidance will be provided. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-12 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder 2. "The President's budget request divides the $85 million increase into three components: $45 million to support the expanded core state and local agency workload associated with implementing the additional ozone, NO2, SO2, lead, and fine particulate NAAQS and addressing risks from air toxics; $25 million to address development of state and local technical capacity to address GHG emissions in permitting of large sources identified pursuant to regulation under the CAA; and, $15 million specifically targeted for the increased number of monitors required by the new or revised NAAQS." Comment: Separating the ongoing support costs ($45 million) from the hardware costs ($15 million) appears initially to be programmatically expedient, the distinction is not clearly defined when implementing new NAAQS standards particularly in the case of the new source oriented monitoring portions of the new standards. The hardware costs ($15 million) includes significant support costs due to the purchase of not only the monitors but new shelters, and the associated construction/installation costs associated with the new sites. Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 31 NPM Response The $15 million targeted for new equipment is intended to cover monitors as well as the establishment of monitoring sites, to include shelters and associated construction/installation . Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-13 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance 3. "The $45 million is intended to supplement the existing level of funds that state and local agencies have been using for continuing program responsibilities." Comment: It is difficult in the implementation stage of these new standards to know the entirety of the cost of installing the newly located monitoring systems. Clearly the operating costs for states' ambient networks will increase as the new systems are put in place but the initial costs of installation cannot at this time be clearly delineated. It is better to approach the implementing phase with more flexible funding expectations while transitioning to ongoing program costs in the out years Virginia Department of Environmental Quality p. 31 We will work closely with our partners on allocating the funds to ensure flexibility while establishing and implementing new/revised monitoring networks and their operations and maintenance. This consultation will contribute to our ongoing determinations of out-year monitoring resource needs as we assemble our budget requests and program plans. None required. 4. In the Grant Assistance to Co- Implementers Section under Core Activities, the guidance discusses the multi-pollutant and regional nature of air pollution and the need to conduct increasingly complex analyses. National Association of Clean Air Agencies agrees with this assessment and recommends that EPA fully endorse regional and multi-pollutant planning efforts. We encourage EPA to support consolidated efforts and ensure there are no impediments to efficient National Association of Clean Air Agencies p. 31 Agree. As a follow-up to the February 4, 2010 meeting between senior EPA managers and representatives of NACAA, a joint workgroup will examine regional planning needs. The workgroup will assess the best approach or approaches to address air pollution control issues and needs that are of a multi-jurisdictional or regional nature. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 14 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder and effective efforts (e.g., through multi-jurisdictional organizations and regional planning organizations). 5. "The additional funding requested for FY 201 1 will help defray the purchase costs of new monitors for ozone, lead, SO2, and NO2 for state and local agencies. EPA proposes to use the authority under CAA §103 to purchase the monitors with operation and maintenance costs being funded out of the state and local agencies' Section 105 dollars. Air monitoring is addressed in greater detail in Appendix C." Comment: While EPA is approaching the equipment needs in a very productive way by funding the hardware needs from the non-match 103 program, the funding of operation and maintenance from matching program will need to be viewed as a future years cost. The physical plant needed to implement the new standards will be larger than in past changes to ambient standards because of the significant investment in source oriented network monitors. The current ambient monitoring networks with relatively few exceptions do not have permanent source oriented monitors except for those designated as source Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 31-32 NPM Response EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 15 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance oriented monitors. It is not clear at this point what the initial capital and construction costs will be for the new monitoring network requirements imposed by the new standards. Clearly initial and ongoing costs will need to be addressed but the better approach may be to provide all the initial outright funding through the 103 program and allow the anticipated transition from 103 to 105 programs serve as the means of funding the ongoing operating costs through the 105 program. 6. National Association of Clean Air Agencies believes that it is important for EPA to develop an allocation of grant funds among activities and regions that is fair and equitable. We recognize that the formula EPA has used in the past for regional allocations is outdated and should be revised. The proposed increase in state and local air grants, assuming Congress appropriates it, provides an opportunity for EPA to begin distributing funds according to an updated formula while ensuring that state and local air programs are not disrupted by decreased grants as a result of the new allocation. The recommended level of funding should be sufficient to ensure that every region receives a fair and equitable increase in grants above its FY 2010 allocation. National Association of Clean Air Agencies p. 32 An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA— population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems, and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles to help guide the development and implementation of a methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi- jurisdictional organizations during its development and which the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of the approach over time. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-16 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder While the distribution of the grant funds is ultimately EPA's responsibility, National Association of Clean Air Agencies looks forward to continuing its discussions with EPA about the reallocation. 7. National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that the funds to support the Diesel Emission Reduction (DERA) provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 not be part of the STAG account, since many of the funds are not provided to state and local governments. We recommend that the funds be provided through one of EPA's other accounts. 8. With respect to the distribution of the DERA funds, National Association of Clean Air Agencies hopes that EPA will continue to keep the program open to both attainment and nonattainment areas. Many state and local agencies have active diesel emission reduction programs that apply outside of nonattainment areas to reduce air toxics, greenhouse gases and haze. 9. Throughout the draft document, EPA acknowledges the need for training for state and local air agencies as new programs and policies are introduced. We appreciate the recognition of the importance of Commenter (s) National Association of Clean Air Agencies National Association of Clean Air Agencies National Association of Clean Air Agencies Location in Draft Guidance p. 32 p. 32 p. 33 NPM Response Congress determines the suitable appropriation for the Diesel Emission Reduction programs. Agree. We will continue to keep the program open to both attainment and nonattainment areas. EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and material to support training development and delivery. All of the state grant money held supports classroom and field training. All EPA funding is used to develop training materials. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-17 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder training in the draft. Unfortunately, there appears to be a disconnect between the stated need for training and the level of funding provided within EPA's own budget. EPA notes that it is diverting approximately $2 million from state and local air grants to fund training, but nowhere does it indicate how much the agency itself is proposing to spend on training. There is a need for core training support at the federal level, particularly for maintaining, updating and developing training courses and coordinating with the state and local training coordinators. For many years National Association of Clean Air Agencies has recommended that EPA fund training from its own budget, and we have agreed to match EPA's expenditures for training from Section 105 grants during the transition to full EPA funding. Unfortunately, full EPA funding has not yet occurred. In recognition of the importance of training and the need for adequate funding, as in the past, National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that EPA hold $1,995,000 in Section 105 funds off the top for training and urges the agency to at least match the Section 105 grant funding for training from EPA's own budget. Further, National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-18 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder adequate staffing support be allocated within EPA to provide necessary training services to state and local agencies. 10. With respect to grant competition, EPA states that co-regulator status is no longer available as an exception to competition for grants for multi- jurisdictional organizations (MJOs). This change was made by the previous Administration. As we have commented in the past, National Association of Clean Air Agencies disagrees with this view and believes that co-regulator organizations, such as National Association of Clean Air Agencies and the MJOs, should continue to be treated under an exception to competition requirements. It would be very inefficient for EPA and those organizations to undergo a competitive process when those entities are each uniquely qualified to perform their missions and were established by their members for this express purpose. There are no other organizations that directly represent their members and are able to carry out the national and regional environmental and public health objectives of their members. 1 1 . EPA is seeking specific comment on how the proposed increase in Commenter (s) National Association of Clean Air Agencies WESTAR Location in Draft Guidance p. 34 and Appendix B, p. 4 p. 30 NPM Response When EPA revised its competition policy the Agency also committed to reevaluate its applicability to MJOs once additional experience was gained using other available exceptions. The Agency has determined that MJOs have been able to continue to receive grants under the public interest exception without difficulty. That said, the Agency is continuing to reexamine the policy to determine whether further adjustments in exceptions or exemptions from competition for MJOs are warranted. EPA expects to clarify the policy by the fall of CY 2010. An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-19 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance state/local grant resources should be distributed. As the draft guidance suggests, these proposed increases should be allocated based on the increased workload each is intended to address. In the case of the $45 million targeted to address the increased workload associated with new and updated NAAQS, WESTAR believes that much of this increase should be allocated to develop regional planning capacity in the western U.S. EPA has historically allocated a significant share of the national STAG grant to fund regional planning in other parts of the country over the past 20 years, and now western states are in need of a commensurate level of support. Our rationale is explained in WESTAR's comments on EPA's 2007 proposal to revise the ozone standard. In summary, WESTAR concurs with EPA's intention to allocate the proposed $85 million increase based on the increased workload associated with revisions to the NAAQS. Accordingly, just as EPA has provided proportionally higher resources to other parts of the country in the past as they built capacity to address regional air quality issues, western state and local agencies should be allotted a significant share of to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA— population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems, and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles to help guide the development and implementation of a methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi- jurisdictional organizations during its development and which the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of the approach over time. In addition, EPA is planning on implementing the revised allocation approach beginning in FY 2011 to respond to current air quality conditions and stakeholder needs. There will be additional opportunities to address the concerns raised by WESTAR and western states: (1) The Agency has established an internal workgroup to examine overall multi- jurisdictional and regional planning needs and concerns. Following the February NACAA-EPA retreat; the workgroup will be consulting with states, locals and other partners specifically on this matter; (2) EPA will continue its consultations with state and local air agencies on the implementation and periodic update, as necessary, of the revised air grant allocation rationale; (3) EPA will continue to work with its partners on implementation of specific funding priorities in FY 2011. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-20 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder the $85 million to build similar capacity in the west. 12. In the proposed 201 1 grant guidance, EPA proposes to "form a workgroup to examine the continued need, available resources, and optimum organizational structure for support of broader, multi-pollutant regional planning". While we agree that such a discussion is needed, talking about resources will not provide the funding that is needed now for continued operation of the regional planning organizations (RPOs). EPA guidance should explicitly commit resources to support RPOs in 201 1, and those funds should not come off the top of the grant but instead should be additive to the 20 11 grant. 13. While EPA acknowledges the workload challenges faced by state and local agencies and further anticipates workload to expand, the grant guidance is effectively silent on EPA's commitment to partnering with state and local agencies to ensure a vibrant and effective national training program. The 201 1 grant guidance is vague on EPA's commitment of agency resources to support training, focusing instead on their intention to consult with state and local agencies on how Commenter (s) WESTAR WESTAR Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response See response to #1 1 immediately above. EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and material to support training development and delivery. All of the state grant money held supports classroom and field training. All EPA funding is used to develop training materials. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-21 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance they will spend their STAG money "for the support of CAA training". The grant guidance should be amended to address this deficiency to clearly acknowledge EPA's responsibilities as spelled out in the Clean Air Act to "conduct and promote coordination and acceleration of training for individuals relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution". In addition, the grant guidance should be amended to provide details on EPA's commitment of agency resources that will be targeted to support training. 14. The first bullet of the Program Strategy Section on this page references working with partners to target available resources to problems causing the greatest risk. We understand that EPA has expended significant effort to develop a revised grant allocation process that is designed to accomplish this goal - addressing the greatest air quality concerns and the associated costs to resolve them. Metro 4 and SESARM have communicated with Assistant Administrator Gina McCarthy in recent months about the allocation formula and our willingness to participate in developing an implementation process. We continue to offer our assistance in this effort. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 30 An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA— population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems, and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles to help guide the development and implementation of a methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi- jurisdictional organizations during its development and which the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of the approach over time. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-22 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Our agencies have an extreme interest in this work and appreciate EPA reassessment of allocation process so that funds are distributed more proportionally to regional workloads. 15. The sixth bullet in the Program Strategy Section on this page references supporting state and MJO efforts to develop information and strategies to reduce haze and improve visibility. For several years we have been advocating a multi-pollutant "one-atmosphere" approach to emissions and modeling analysis work. In fact, Metro 4 and SESARM have been actively assessing southeastern fine particles, ozone, and regional haze using a consolidated approach for several years and continue to do so. We encourage EPA to support consolidated efforts of this type and to ensure that there are no impediments to such efficient and effective efforts. We understand that regional haze provisions of the CAA may be so distinct as to require separate mention, but we wish to ensure that the multi- pollutant analysis approach is fully accepted by EPA. Lines of delineation between interrelated programs need to be eliminated where possible to allow maximum flexibility for agencies through their MJOs to direct funding where it is most needed. One outcome Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 30 NPM Response Some regional planning organizations are chartered only to address regional haze, and are eligible to receive federal funding only for doing work to address regional haze. To receive federal funding for broader responsibilities, the regional planning organizations must revise their charter. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-23 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder of the January EPA meeting with National Association of Clean Air Agencies referenced in Comment 1 is a task to "discuss funding the Regional Planning Organizations and the extent to which the RPO mission should be expanded (i.e., beyond regional haze)." While evaluation of funding options and mechanisms is a recommended task, there should be no need to evaluate a multi-pollutant mission. The MJOs that formed the RPOs are already actively involved in assessments of other air quality issues besides regional haze. The efficiencies of such processes (doing work for several states simultaneously instead of state-by-state efforts) are already clearly documented, as are the desires of the agencies to pursue their air quality assessments through such consolidated approaches. 16. The eighth bullet in the Program Strategy Section on this page references EPA providing support for training to assist agencies in addressing their air pollution problems. Over the past few years, EPA has reduced its direct investment in traditional core training and has transferred much of that responsibility (but no independent funding) to regional MJOs. Local and state agencies have been required to use a portion of their STAG funds as well Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 30 NPM Response EPA continues to allocate contract funds, staffing, and material to support training development and delivery. All of the state grant money held supports classroom and field training. All EPA funding is used to develop training materials. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-24 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder as personnel resources to support these transferred efforts. EPA staff often seek to attend training that the MJOs offer because it is one of the most convenient, effective, and affordable training alternatives to which federal employees have access. To its credit, EPA offers much needed information on new and emerging requirements through its outreach program and is actively engaged with the local and state programs through National Association of Clean Air Agencies in national training strategy discussions. However, there is a need for core training support at the federal level, particularly for maintenance of training courses, managing course updates and development, and interfacing with the local and state training coordinators. We encourage EPA to strengthen its support in this area. 17. In the Grant Assistance to Co- Implementors Section, EPA describes in the introductory paragraph and immediately below Table 2 the increased investment of $82.5 million in local and stage agency programs. We commend EPA for suggesting increased funding in the FFY 2011 budget. It is forward-thinking and we fully support the additional funding that has been proposed. Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 30-31 NPM Response We look forward to continued cooperation with our stakeholders in addressing funding matters. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-25 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance 18. In the Grant Assistance to Co- Implementors Section under Core Activities, the guidance discusses the multi-pollutant and regional nature of air pollution and the need to conduct increasingly complex analysis. We concur with this assessment and suggest that EPA fully endorse regional, multi- pollutant planning efforts. It should not be necessary to maintain separate grants to support similar efforts to address interrelated air quality problems. EPA should accept SIP submittals containing regional assessments of air quality that contain state-specific information instead of requiring states to obligate limited resources to personalizing the regional analyses on a state-by-state basis. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 31 Regional analyses that include state-specific information are acceptable so long as they meet the requirements that apply to individual states. None required. 19. Also in the Core Activities Section, EPA requests comment on the distribution process for local and state grant resources. We suggest that EPA reserve 20% ($9 million) of the $45 million core program increase to provide equity adjustments to the six regions that stand to gain from the recent workload and grant allocation analysis. If $45 million in additional funding remains in place in succeeding years (which we request) and if EPA will continue to award the requested equity adjustment in succeeding years Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 31 An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA— population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems, and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles to help guide the development and implementation of a methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi- jurisdictional organizations during its development and which the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-26 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder (which we also request), the current annual disproportionate allocation that currently exists could be permanently eliminated. The $9 million equity adjustment that we suggest should be distributed proportionally to the six aforementioned regions using factors developed through a comparison of the relative change in regional allocation percentages under the new formula versus the old one. We project that Region 4 local and state agencies would receive slightly more than $5 million if this process is used. We can provide more details of our proposal and calculations if EPA would be interested in reviewing them. The remaining $36 million of new core program funding after the equity adjustment should be distributed to all regions consistent with the workload demands that have been identified in EPA's recent analysis. 20. In the Increasing Capacity for GHG Permitting Section, EPA correctly recognizes the need for additional resources to prepare to meet future local and state agency obligations for permitting GHG sources. We concur with the listing of activities that are important to this effort; namely, staff development and training, program planning and analysis, source identification, outreach to industry, and Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 31 NPM Response the approach over time. EPA is working with NACAA to develop a draft allocation methodology to distribute the funds. The factors mentioned are being considered as part of that process. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-27 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder responding to the public. We suggest that EPA distribute the $25 million in new funding to the regions proportional to the levels of emissions from industrial and utility sources or the numbers of point sources of GHG emissions. We have tried to obtain a listing of individual sources by region for these sectors but have been unable to do so. We believe that the distribution of GHG sources will generally mirror the distribution of GHG emissions across the regions. The EPA web site www.epa.aov/climatechanae/emissions /downloads/CO2FFC 2007.xls shows that Region 4 has 20-25% of total national GHG emissions from sectors that are likely targets for permitting. We recognize that the purpose of this funding is directly related to the permitting burden that the agencies will incur. We suggest that the funds should be distributed accordingly. 2 1 . The draft guidance states that additional funding requested for FFY 201 1 will "help defray" the costs of new monitors ..." EPA further proposes to fund purchases using Section 103 authority and operation and maintenance costs through Section 105. Southeastern agencies have suggested that the $15 million, while helpful, is Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 31-32 NPM Response EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-28 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder woefully short of what is needed to cover the new costs with which they will be burdened. Monitoring is the single-most costly program that our agencies implement. We encourage EPA to reexamine the cost burdens placed on our agencies and allocate additional funding in the amount of $15 million, making for a total available amount of $30 million, to off-set the purchase costs of this equipment. If there are purchases that can be deferred to FFY 2012 while conforming to the NAAQS schedules, we encourage EPA to allocate additional funding for FFY 2012 to cover more of the monitoring costs. Our agencies are concerned about the plan to require O&M funding to be awarded under Section 105. First, there is not enough funding to pay for equipment purchase and O&M. Second, mandating a program that is not properly funded and requiring a match of 40% may create impossibilities for some agencies. At a minimum, there needs to be as much assistance as possible provided to our agencies so that the desired monitoring network can be more fully deployed. We suggest, at a minimum, that Section 103 funding be utilized for the first five years for the new monitoring programs that are being required. Since the costs of new monitoring requirements are Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-29 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance directly proportional to the number and locations of monitors prescribed, we would accept an allocation process designed to distribute the funding to the states based on the numbers, types, and costs of new monitors in each region. 22. Reference is made in the Clean Air Act Training Section to "approximately $2 million in STAG funds" being targeted to support CAA training. Many years ago, EPA budgeted about $2 million from its own funds to support training and local/state agencies contributed a similar amount. If we interpret the proposal correctly, it suggests that EPA has targeted local/state STAG dollars to support CAA training. We encourage EPA to provide additional funding as mentioned earlier in this comment. We further encourage EPA to separate references to its own funding commitments with those that are at the discretion of the local/state agencies. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 33 EPA allocates contract funds, staffing, and material to support training development and delivery. All of the state grant money held supports classroom and field training. All EPA funding is used to develop training materials. None required. 23. In the Regional-level MJOs Section, EPA establishes funding qualification criteria for MJOs. EPA further states that MJO funding must be consistent with its competition policy. We understand the general criteria and agree that there are many funding sources within EPA that are designed Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 34 When EPA revised its competition policy the Agency also committed to reevaluate its applicability to MJOs once additional experience was gained using other available exceptions. The Agency has determined that MJOs have been able to continue to receive grants under the public interest exception without difficulty. That said, the Agency is continuing to reexamine the policy to determine whether further adjustments in exceptions or exemptions from None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-30 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder for full and open competition. STAG funds are not in the same category and member agencies should be able to designate portions of their funding to MJOs without major complication. EPA chose, with some external direction we acknowledge, to make changes to the competition policy in recent years and those changes have made it more difficult for local/state agencies to designate portions of their own STAG funding to the MJOs. We believe that this more complicated and cumbersome process is being counterproductive by stressing the resources of the awarding regions as well as the MJOs. MJO work serves the public interest and we are natural extensions of the local and state co- regulators/co-implementors. This funding would not be going out for competition if the MJOs did not exist. It would be going to the local and state agencies. We understand that EPA has committed in recent months to try to streamline the process to make it easier to award funding to the MJOs. We applaud such efforts. A consistent and responsible approach that supports the public interest in an efficient manner and that minimizes the consumption of agency resources should be applied to the MJO funding process throughout the EPA regional offices. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response competition for MJOs are warranted. EPA expects to clarify the policy by the fall of CY 2010. Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-31 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder 24. In the Regional Planning Organizations Section, EPA references the work of RPOs on regional haze. We would like to point out that all ten states participating in the Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. VISTAS project have submitted draft regional haze SIPs and nine of those states have submitted proposed and final SIPS. We are proud of the technical work that we have done and of the efforts of our states to incorporate those efforts into their individual SIPs. In the cases where the SIP submittals have been delayed, it has been due to the need to examine additional controls for BART sources and/or to meet desired regional haze goals. We applaud the work of the VISTAS states to lead the country in submittal of regional haze SIPs. As stated earlier in Comments 7 and 10, we believe it is time to merge the terminology of MJOs and RPOs due to the integrated, regional, multi-pollutant work that they are doing. We would be pleased to participate in a work group to examine obligations and needed and available resources. We are less certain that the organizational structure needs examination since the organizations are structured as determined necessary by their member agencies. However, we are open to an analysis of what has Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 34-35 NPM Response Reflecting joint discussions with our co-implementors earlier this year, EPA has agreed to more closely examine the nature of, and best approaches for addressing multi-pollutant, regional planning needs. The Agency has recently formed a Headquarters-Regional Office workgroup and will continue to consult with our co-implementors on this topic. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-32 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder worked best and what could be improved. We have utilized a conservative and practical approach to minimize costs while delivering needed services and feel that we have been responsible stewards of the funding that has been made available us in the past, for which we are very appreciative. 25. In the section on NAAQS - FFY 2011 Priorities is a bullet on the air quality management plan pilot projects. We look forward to reviewing the reports of lessons learned and interacting with the participating agencies as well as EPA to identify opportunities to better streamline the SIP process. Integrating land use, transportation, energy, climate, environmental justice, and ecosystem impacts are important, but we must never lose our primary obligation to manage air quality. In doing so, we must use an integrated, multi-pollutant approach and the requirements for development, submittal, and approval of SIPs must be streamlined. The bullet immediately following the pilot project bullet seems to be redundant and can probably be removed. 26. The EPA acknowledges that Indian Tribes may choose to develop and implement their own air quality Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. National Tribal Air Association Location in Draft Guidance p. 35 p. 30-31 NPM Response EPA is working on several projects to examine the benefits of multi-pollutant approaches that also ensure that such approaches fit within the confines of the Clean Air Act. EPA will work with tribes to help them identify and address their needs related to climate change. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-33 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder programs (see page 9), with such Tribes going so far as to permit greenhouse gas (GHG) emission sources on their respective lands. The NTAA communicated this latter point when it commented on the proposed Tailoring Rule, also calling for the resources necessary for Tribes to help regulate GHGs under the Rule. Indian Tribes are in a position to regulate GHGs for stationary sources such as the Navajo Nation and Southern Ute Tribe. The NTAA therefore recommends that the EPA back up its climate change commitment to Tribes with the necessary resources to help them develop the technical capacity to permit those sources identified under the Tailoring Rule for their GHG emissions, the same type of resources being so generously made available to states and local governments. Resources to Tribes would not only help them to effectively reduce GHG emissions but would also help them to curb the adverse impacts of climate change facing the planet as a whole. Without such resources, however, Tribes will be forced to implement the Tailoring Rule at their own expense, an expense not easily incurred, or become subject to a federal implementation plan under which there may little flexibility Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-34 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance as to how business will be able to be carried out in Indian Country or Alaska Native Villages. 27. The OAR Guidance calls for the formation of a workgroup to "examine the continued need, available resources, and optimum organizational structure for support of broader, multi-pollutant regional planning" (see page 35). Based on the aforementioned benefits that RPOs have provided to Indian Tribes, the NTAA recommends that Tribes should have an opportunity for direct input into the workgroup discussions in accordance with Executive Order 13175, the 1984 EPA Indian Policy, and the DOE American Indian and Alaska Native Policy. National Tribal Air Association p. 33 OAR recognizes and appreciates the benefits that the RPO's provided to support the development of regional haze SIP's, and continues to recognize the benefits offered by closely coordinated regional planning involving states, tribes and local air quality management programs. OAR is examining approaches to continue this activity, and hopes to begin discussions with all involved parties in calendar year 2010. OAR encourages and appreciates tribes and the National Tribal Air Association Executive Committee continuing their involvement in this discussion and future activities. None required. 28. With the potential increases to the Section 105 allocations, concerns have been raised by several agencies about their ability to provide the required 40% match on these supplemental funds. Some agencies have begun to ask questions about having latitude to bring in other sources of funding for the match such as from the Title V area, and still others have raised concerns about the implications stemming from raising their MOE levels because of the additional match funds that they will have to provide. In general, agencies Region 4 p. 30-32 As a follow-up to a February 2010 EPA-NACAA retreat, OAR has already begun been working with Regions and with NACAA to identify implementation issues and develop potential solutions associated with the utilization of increased STAG funds as well as transitions in funding authority. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-35 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance have for years raised potential MOE concerns, seeking relief from the MOE requirements or latitude to make appropriate adjustments if EPA's funding levels drop (e.g., between 2011 and 2012). Agencies have also expressed their support for providing as much funding for monitoring activities under Section 103 including continuing to provide PM2.5 monitoring grant funds under Section 103, which eliminates the concerns raised above regarding match. 29. Region 4 supports continuing to set aside funds " to make training grants to air pollution control agencies and other qualified entities related to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, and control of air pollution. " However, in Region 4, our State and Local agencies have chosen to provide those funds to MJO's (e.g., SESARM (supports training courses for States), and METRO 4 (supports training for local agencies)) that facilitate delivery of training courses based on expressed needs that benefit the collective through pooling of resources. However, the ability of these entities to continue to accept training funds in 2010, as well as 2011 is being directly impacted by budget constraints stemming from the previous grant competition waiver (i.e, co- Region 4 p. 32 OAR and the Regions have provided additional input to OGD on the relationship between state, local, and tribal agencies and the MJOs they have formed including the nature of their roles and responsibilities using STAG funds. OGD is currently reexamining the Competition Policy's applicability to MJOs and has held several calls with NPMs, Regions, and MJOs on how to improve the policy. OGD recognizes the important relationship that MJOs have with states, locals, and tribes in helping carry out their responsibilities. OGD expects to announce an updated Policy reflecting these considerations in the fall of CY 2010. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-36 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder regulator exemption and/or public interest exemption). Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Issue Area: Climate Protection 1 . National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that EPA coordinate closely with affected state and local agencies before initiating any technical assistance, compliance or enforcement activities with sources regulated by the state or local agencies. This is especially important with respect to state or local agencies with planned or existing GHG reporting regulations. 2. In the Tailoring Rule section, a priority of EPA headquarters is to develop guidance to assist permitting authorities. As with all federal programs, timely and detailed guidance is necessary and we encourage the agency to expedite the development of this guidance. There is also a commitment in this section for regions to work with states in evaluating and building permitting capacity. We are pleased that EPA is addressing this issue. We encourage the agency to assist actively with the development and delivery of necessary training as this process continues. 3 . National Association of Clean Air National Association of Clean Air Agencies National Association of Clean Air Agencies National p. 45 p. 47 p. 48 We will coordinate closely with our partners. EPA will issue guidance and provide training so that permitting authorities are prepared to implement the Title V and NSR programs. We plan to continue our on-going conversations with States, None required. None required. Language Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-37 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Agencies urges EPA to coordinate with or provide guidance to state or local air agencies that are pursuing low-carbon fuel standards in order to improve understanding and identify any overlap between the federal and state or local programs. Association of Clean Air Agencies local governments, and other groups on our ongoing analyses and rule developments related to the Renewable Fuel Standard. added. 4. The draft guidance does not include a list of potential New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for GHG. If EPA is not able to include a list at this time, perhaps the grant guidance could indicate that the larger emitting source categories would be assessed as potential candidates for NSPS and provide a list of example categories, rather than a definitive list. National Association of Clean Air Agencies p. 49 EPA is obligated to periodically review NSPS for all categories, revising them as necessary and appropriate. We intend to consider GHG emissions in the course of those reviews, but we cannot say for what, if any, categories of sources would we establish performance standards for GHG emissions at this time. None required. 5. The draft document implies, but does not clearly state, that the level of efficiency or performance required to receive the "Energy Star" label should be increased. This should be made more explicit in the final document. National Association of Clean Air Agencies p. 50 Agree. We have added a clarifiying sentence to the end of the paragraph in question. Clarification provided. 6. In the Mandatory GHG Reporting Rule section under FFY 2011 Priorities, regional responsibilities identified include developing a list of facilities that may be required to report, developing a strategy for notifying these facilities of those obligations, participating in training sessions, and presenting GHG reporting rule Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 46 Agree. We intend to work closely with our partners on this issue. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-38 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder information at meetings and conferences. We concur with this approach and request that EPA headquarters and the regions partner with local and state agencies to train appropriate staff and strategize how best to disseminate the required information to all stakeholders. 7. In the Proposed PSD and Title V GHG Tailoring Rule Section, a stated priority of EPA headquarters is to develop guidance to assist permitting authorities. As with all federal programs, timely and detailed guidance is necessary. We encourage EPA to fast-track the development of this guidance. EPA should develop simplified approaches to permitting GHGs such as general permits and/or presumptive BACT. There are many uncertainties in the control options for GHS sources at this time and having some categorical standards of performance would conserve resources for our agencies. There is also a commitment in this section for regions to work with the states to evaluate and build permitting capacity. We acknowledge that EPA is beginning to tackle this issue. We encourage EPA to develop timely expectations for permit conditions and control requirements for GHG sources and further that EPA Commenter (s) Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. Location in Draft Guidance p. 47 NPM Response EPA will develop timely guidance and training for permitting authorities. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-39 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder assist actively with development and delivery of needed training as the capacity-building process continues. 8. The OAR Guidance states that EPA regions will "[w]ork with HQ to assist states in evaluating and building the permitting capacity necessary to address affected sources of GHGs" (see page 47) and that the President's budget request includes "$25 million to address development of state and local technical capacity to address GHG emissions in permitting of large sources identified pursuant to regulation under the CAA" (see page 31) - i.e., the proposed PSD and Title V Tailoring Rule. Conspicuously absent from this list are Indian Tribes, the same Tribes for which the EPA has stated it will "[d]irectly, and working closely with the regions, support tribal efforts to understand, assess, mitigate and adapt to climate change" (see page 42). 9. If Climate Leaders is included as a priority for the regions, it seems inconsistent to not include it for HQ, especially since HQ runs the program. Green Power, a related program, is included for both the regions and HQ. Commenter (s) National Tribal Air Association Region 5 Location in Draft Guidance p. 47 p. 50, 52 NPM Response OAR has greatly increased outreach to tribes on greenhouse gas related rulemakings such as the GHG Reporting Rule and the Tailoring Rule, while ensuring that they are involved in discussions to develop rulemakings and that their comments and interests are included and addressed. OAR remains committed to working closely with tribes and supporting their participation in all our programs. Agree. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Revised the 5th bullet under Voluntary Climate Protection Programs. Issue Area: Tribal Air Quality Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-40 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance 1. I noticed in approximately (4) areas that reservations was used only in two areas but in the other two, it was reservation and tribal communities in the other two. Should this be consistent? Linda Robins, Chickasaw, Region 6 p. 42, 43, 44 We are amending the original language to use the correct term in a consistent manner. Indian country properly describes the jurisdiction of federally-recognized Indian tribes over their lands. Made changes is several locations. 2. Provide a complete listing of acronyms and what they mean and what agency they are under. Ambrie Walker, Chickasaw, Region 6 Rather than a separate list of acronyms, we have tried to spell out all acronyms at least once in each chapter where they appear. None required. 3. It seems that the part for the tribes is reporting to the grant or agency. Is that the only role for the tribes? Ambrie Walker, Chickasaw, Region 6 Tribes are only required to report to EPA as part of their obligation when accepting federal funding support. Due to the unique status of federally-recognized Indian tribes, federal law and trust responsibility and other obligations including those based on EPA and federal government policies, including the 1998 Tribal Authority Rule, tribal participation in CAA programs, while strongly encouraged, is voluntary, and while tribes have an important role in CAA and voluntary program implementation in Indian country, their obligations to act and report under this administrative grant guidance, are not extensive. None required. 4. As one its headquarters priorities, the EPA states that it will "[d]irectly, and working closely with the regions, support tribal efforts to understand, assess, mitigate and adapt to climate change" (see page 42). The Agency further states as one of its regional priorities that it will "[p]rovide support to tribal air quality assessment activities such as emission inventories ..." (see page 43). Up until now, the EPA has failed to provide Indian Tribes with the National Tribal Air Association p. 42 OAR is fully supportive of tribal participation in all of its programs, including those associated with climate change activities, as demonstrated by activities to date including extensive outreach to tribes on rules such as those dealing with fuels and GHG reporting requirements. While we are required to prioritize competing resources to implement CAA and voluntary programs to protect human health, resources and the environment (in Indian country for this program), Regional Offices are encouraged to make case-by-case decisions based on their close relationships with individual Indian tribes on how to allocate available resources to accomplish tribal and EPA goals in the most efficient manner possible. At the None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H -41 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance necessary resources to conduct GHG emission inventories, typically limiting inventories to conventional pollutants such as those controlled under the Clean Air Act's national ambient air quality standards. To be full partners in addressing climate change, however, Tribes need to know their carbon footprint from which they can begin to reduce GHG emissions and contribute to the nation's overall effort to reduce the adverse impacts of climate change. The NTAA therefore recommends that the EPA Regions work with Tribes to provide them with the necessary resources to develop GHG emissions inventories. region's discretion, this can and should include working with tribes to develop GHG emissions inventories where appropriate. OAR is also working to amend the Tribal Emission Inventory software to further facilitate this task. 5. As one its headquarters priorities for Indian Tribes and as the NTAA recommended regarding the FY 2008, 2009 and 2010 OAR Guidance, the EPA should establish a priority specific to international issues. A number of Tribes, specifically those on the border of neighboring countries and those along coastal waters, are impacted by air pollutants from both near and far away. As such, some effort on the part of the OAR to address these emissions would subsequently help to address Tribal issues and concerns regarding the air quality over the lands of Tribes. At the very least, the NTAA National Tribal Air Association We have referred your recommendation to establish an international priority to EPA's Office of International and Tribal Affairs, and recommendation to expand research, to EPA's Office of Research and Development, for their consideration in future planning and priority-setting activities they may undertake. Additionally, through the bi-national Border 2012 Air Policy Forum, in which numerous tribes along the U.S.-Mexico border are actively involved, members from both sides of the border are working collaboratively to reduce conventional air pollutants in the border region, as well as GHG emissions. Projects run the gamut from ambient air monitoring to retrofitting school buses, to requiring use of ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel in freight trucks operating in the border region, to testing emissions from vehicles idling at border crossings. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-42 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance recommends that the EPA expand its research on international transport and atmospheric deposition, including research on the effects of atmospheric deposition on the food chain of Tribal subsistence foods and treaty-reserved lands. On the Canadian border, ambient monitoring is in place and real-time data is available in both countries. Transport of air pollutants is studied and monitored as well. Atmospheric deposition monitoring and modeling has been extensive in the U.S.-Canada border area and further afield in both countries. Regarding effects of deposition on the food chain of tribal subsistence foods and treaty-reserved lands, we will work with our researchers to examine current data and explore possibilities of additional research that may be needed to fill in data gaps. 6. The Healthier Outdoor Air Chapter, Tribal Air Quality Management Section should better define how the HQ and regions will provide support to the tribes. There is a statement on page 32 that the allocation of tribal grant funds will be addressed later. However, the $266k increase in tribal grant funds shown on Table 2 on page 31 will not address all of the grant support areas listed on pages 42 and 43 or be adequate to support the tribal activities listed on pages 43 and 44. In addition, EPA regions are limited in the amount of staff and other technical resources available to assist tribes. Region 6 The referenced increase is in the President's budget, but is dependant on the budget process. We will not know if that funding will become available until a budget is passed by the Congress and signed by the President. Should the additional funding become available, the annual tribal STAG allocation will be used to allocate that funding to each Regional Office based on existing allocation factors. Regional Offices are expected to work with available funding and prioritize grant requests in accordance with existing policies, including the 2005 Criteria for Providing Funds to Tribes from the State and Tribal Assistance Grant Appropriation for 103 and 105 Grants. None required. Issue Area: Appendix A - Performance Measures 1. NAAQS - We recommend an additional Regional Performance Measure to address the NAAQS Region 6 Appendix A iThe National Program Office (OAQPS) discussed the concept lof adding additional performance measures with the (appropriate sublead regional office. Both the NPM and the None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-43 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response sublead region decided against adding these additional measures this year. Action Taken in Final Guidance infrastructure requirements for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS found in Clean Air Act 110(a)(2). The performance measure could be: Number of actions to address CAA 110(a)(2) certification letters for the 1997 Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS referenced in our Findings Notices of 2008 (March 27, 2008 and October 22, 2008 Federal Register notices). The National Target could be the "Sum of Bids." 2. NAAQS - We recommend a performance measure for the Lead NAAQS 110(a)(2) submittals (due October 15, 2011). The performance measure could be: Number of State and Local Agency submittals to address CAA section 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead NAAQS promulgated October 15, 2008. The national target would be "Sum of Bids." Region 6 Appendix A The National Program Office (OAQPS) discussed the concept of adding additional performance measures with the appropriate sublead regional office. Both the NPM and the sublead region decided against adding these additional measures this year. None required. 3. OAQPS P06 and P21. EPA Region 6 will most likely commit to one or the other of these two measures. Regions should have the option of doing one of these measures in lieu of the other, or doing a very scaled down Title V program audit that focuses on fees while committing to some percentage of Title V permit renewal review. Region 6 Appendix A OAQPS worked in consultation with the Regions to develop these measures. We believe that these measures are essential for ensuring oversight of state permitting activities. None required. 4. Regarding measure OAP 1 if HQ Region 5 Appendix A HQ calculates regional results, and includes these results in None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 44 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance has the data, why doesn't it enter the results into ACS directly instead of giving the data to the regions to enter? This is inefficient. broader, quarterly program reports that are provided to regional program managers. Regional managers use the information in these reports to assess and report their performance within the regions, and to report into ACS. 5. For OAR's climate protection priority, there are only operational measures for the voluntary climate programs. There are no operational measures for Regional Administrators' priorities. OCFO OAR does not manage or conduct oversight on priorities established by Regional Administrators. None required. Issue Area: Appendix B - Effective Use and Distribution of STAG Funds 1. On Page 2 under Improving Work Plans and Measurement of Performance for Grants, EPA proposes to convene a work group to develop a menu of work plan formats. The Southeastern agencies would appreciate the opportunity to be involved in this work group through participation by a staff person from one of the member agencies or a Metro/SESARM staff person. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 2 EPA's Office of Grants and Debarment has set up an Agency- wide workgroup in cooperation with the representatives of the environmental commissioners of states. OAR will inquire about avenues for other state/local input. None required. 2. Under Approval Process for STAG Awards to Co-Regulator Organizations, EPA states that MJOs are subject to determinations that they can be exempted from competition. We believe that Metro 4 and SESARM qualify for exemption under Paragraph 6. c. (6) and exception under Paragraphs 12. a. (2), (4), and (6) of the Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 3-4 The Agency has found that multi-jurisdictional organizations have been very successful in utilizing the public interest exception to competition. That said, the Agency did commit to reexamining the policy and its applicability to MJO operations as extensions of state, local and tribal responsibilities using STAG funds. The Agency is currently consulting internally and with stakeholders and expects to update its approach during FY 2011. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 45 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance competition policy. We do not object to the public interest exception being used as long as it is implemented via an efficient and effective process. The sole purpose of Metro 4 and SESARM is to serve the collective needs of the local and state agencies in the Southeast when it is not practical or possible for each of them to meet their individual or collective needs by themselves. This certainly is a public interest benefit of our existence. We continue to encourage EPA to find a less rigorous and less resource-intensive way to award grant funds to MJOs when those funds are derived from STAG accounts at the direction of the agencies comprising the MJOs. 3. The last paragraph on Page 4 deals with the Preliminary Allocation for State/Local Continuing Air Program Grants. EPA notes that it has not yet developed a preliminary allocation concept for review. For several years, EPA has been working on a new allocation formula. The process was designed ultimately to be applied to the distribution of all Section 105 STAG grant funding from EPA to the local and state agencies in the respective regions. We understand that the formula is currently under further review, given the new funding that has Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 4 An EPA Workgroup composed of both regional and program office representatives worked diligently over a 2-year period to produce a revised methodology that aligned resources consistent with the considerations outlined in the CAA— population affected, severity and extent of the AQ problems, and financial need. The Workgroup also developed principles to help guide the development and implementation of a methodology. EPA has now developed an allocation scheme which it believes applies the principles to the methodology in a manner that directs resources both equitably and strategically across the country. The approach also reflects the valuable input EPA received from state and local agencies and multi- jurisdictional organizations during its development and which the Agency hopes will continue during the implementation of the approach over time. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-46 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder been proposed. Since 2005, Metro 4 and SESARM have been advocating adjustments to the formula and we have gone on record supporting a reasonable phase -in period. We encourage EPA to implement a new allocation approach in FFY 2011 and in future years, along with the equity adjustment suggested in Comment 11. EPA's review suggests that Region 4 agencies qualify for approximately $5 million in additional funds based on a comprehensive evaluation of workload factors. This funding deficiency needs to be rectified in the coming year and all future years. 4. HQ may want to ask each of the regional program offices what workplan elements they are using with their states to develop consistent program work plans. We request that our states include in their State Continuing Program Work Plans workplan program elements that are derived from the National Program Guidance. 5. Typo: "To further improve ... a State/EPA workgroup of grant practioners ..." should be "practitioners." 6. Region 5 is concerned about the statement that "Radon grants to tribes and intertribal consortia under TSCA Commenter (s) Region 5 Region 5 Region 5 Location in Draft Guidance p. 2 p. 2, last paragraph p. 4 NPM Response OAR expects this topic to be addressed as part of an Agency- wide workgroup effort with ECOS to improve and standardize workplans that co-implementors submit for categorical grants and for PPGs. OAR has worked to assure that regional air program interests are adequately represented on this group. Agree. Grants for radon projects (STAG/SIRG) funded under TSCA 10, including those to Ttribes, are subject to EPA's competition policy (EPA Order 5700. 5A1) and must be Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Corrected. No change. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 47 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder §10 grants must be competed." Although this program has been formally competed previously in some regions, including Region 5, we have recently begun to do a "quasi- competition" rather than the full competition to be more efficient and because our region believes it is important to maintain the flexibility to tailor our approach as specific future circumstances warrant. Last year we notified tribes of funding and awarded grants without using formal competition. If the exemption is removed and competition is required, Region 5 is concerned that it may not be as efficient, particularly if the funding decreases. Competition would require that the Request for Proposals be completed by November in order to meet the extended review process required for these particular grants, but it would be difficult to do an RFP in November since we don't know our funding level at that point in the fiscal year. Alternatively, we could issue grants under §306, since those grants don't requirement completion; however, §306 would require a match (which is not required under §10). Tribal matching funds could be a barrier to most tribes. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response competed. Even if radon grants are made available only to tribes, any TSCA 10 grants must be competed. Because tribes are not the only eligible entities under TSCA 10, limiting the competition to tribes requires Grants Competition Advocate (GCA) approval. There is no exemption from competition for TSCA 10 grants to tribes nor has there ever been such an exemption. Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-48 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in I Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Issue Area: Appendix C - Ambient Monitoring 1. National Association of Clean Air Agencies applauds EPA's request for an additional $15 million in FY 2011 Section 103 funds for the purchase of new monitoring equipment, which will greatly enhance the ability of state and local agencies to implement new monitoring requirements for lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone. However, the association is concerned that the requested $15 million falls far short of the funding needed for new monitoring equipment over the next few years. As of March 2010, new and proposed changes to the monitoring networks for NO2, lead, ozone, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) would require hundreds of new monitors beginning in 2011,2012, and 2013. Proposed revisions to the carbon monoxide (CO) and fine particulate (PM2.5) monitoring networks are expected by the end of this year. National Association of Clean Air Agencies Appendix C EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY11. We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. None required. 2. As state and local agencies prepare to implement new monitoring requirements, National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that EPA work together with state and local agencies to develop a method for prioritizing new monitoring equipment purchases and implementation over the National Association of Clean Air Agencies Appendix C EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY11. We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. EPA does plan to update the National Monitoring Strategy to reflect the changes to the monitoring network. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-49 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder next several years. It may be necessary to develop a program for phasing in and funding new monitoring sites, including the expansion of the lead monitoring network in FY 2011. National Association of Clean Air Agencies further recommends updating the National Monitoring Strategy to reflect changes in the monitoring network, include sustainable funding strategies, and address issues such as the importance of special field programs and monitoring to evaluate environmental successes (as recommended by the National Resource Council in its 2004 report, "Air Quality Management in the U.S."). National Association of Clean Air Agencies also suggests allowing state and local agencies the flexibility to use some of the $15 million for operating the monitors, rather than new-equipment purchases only, if that makes the most sense in their circumstances. Such decisions would be determined by the state or local agency and the regional office. The association looks forward to working with EPA to fully develop funding allocation plans for monitoring networks. This includes identifying opportunities for disinvesting in current monitoring activities, along with providing realistic estimates of the associated cost savings. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-50 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder 3 . Collaboration regarding sustainable funding strategies should include proposed funding for photochemical assessment monitoring stations (PAMS), Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) sites and quality assurance. EPA is proposing to reserve 5 percent of FY 201 1 PAMS funds for the purchase of new capital equipment, use $3.8 million of FY 201 1 funding for visibility monitoring at IMPROVE and Clean Air Status and Trends Network (CASTNET) sites, and allocate nearly $3 million in FY 2011 funds for quality assurance programs, including the Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) and National Performance Audit Program (NPAP). While National Association of Clean Air Agencies generally supports these efforts, the association encourages EPA to work with state and local agencies to discuss the ongoing implementation and future needs of these programs before allocating specific funds. 4. EPA is also proposing to transition funding for the PM2.5 monitoring network from Section 103 to Section 105, which requires matching funds from state and local agencies, over four years beginning in FY 201 1 . National Association of Clean Air Agencies does Commenter (s) National Association of Clean Air Agencies National Association of Clean Air Agencies Location in Draft Guidance Appendix C Appendix C NPM Response EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY11. EPA will work closely with NACAA on a transition plan for the PM2.5 funding from Section 103 to Section 105 authority. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H -51 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder not oppose this transition. However, in order to allow state and local agencies adequate time to make the necessary adjustments to their budgets and programs, particularly given the current challenges regarding state resources and the implementation of new monitoring requirements, National Association of Clean Air Agencies recommends that EPA shift funding from Section 103 gradually. Specifically, the association suggests that funding be transitioned from Section 103 on the following schedule: 10 percent in FY 201 1; 20 percent in FY 2012; 40 percent in FY 2013; and 60 percent in FY 2014, before the final shift to 100 percent funding under Section 105 beginning in FY 2015. It is vital that funding levels not be decreased throughout the transition or thereafter. 5. Finally, National Association of Clean Air Agencies encourages EPA's continued support for "hot-spot" community-scale air toxics monitoring. The association looks forward to working with EPA to meet the goals in the National Monitoring Strategy and continue to evaluate the expansion of the air toxics monitoring program. 6. This comment is related to the Commenter (s) National Association of Clean Air Agencies Metro/SESARM Location in Draft Guidance Appendix C p. 4 NPM Response EPA intends to resume a grant competition for Community- Scale Air Toxics Monitoring Projects, which will be expanded to also include additional school monitoring projects. EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-52 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder section on Highlights of Changes in Monitoring Funding for FFY 2011. We acknowledge and appreciate the fact that EPA has requested $15 million to help fund additional air monitoring equipment. However, we understand that $15 million may not even pay for the purchases of monitors for the single most expensive parameter for which expanded monitoring is required. As we stated earlier in Comment 13, we encourage EPA to identify $15 million in additional funding to support this financial burden that is being placed on the agencies and that EPA identify additional funding in FFY 2012 that can be used for monitor purchases that do not have to occur in FFY 2011. 7. This comment is related to the section on Highlights of Changes in Monitoring Funding for FFY 2011. EPA indicates that it is planning to initiate a 4-year transition period for changing PM2.5 monitoring from Section 103 to 105. We have noted earlier in Comments 13 and 24 that there are major financial complications to the costs of purchasing, operating, and maintaining newly required monitoring equipment. Section 103 funding provides the best opportunity to maintain current monitoring equipment and purchase and deploy new Commenter (s) Metro/SESARM Location in Draft Guidance p. 4 NPM Response funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. EPA will work closely with our partners on the allocation of funds for FY1 1 . We will use our statutory authority as appropriate to provide funding for the new and/or revised monitoring networks. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-53 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder equipment. It may be impossible for some agencies to meet existing monitoring obligations and also purchase and provide support for new equipment under the funding approaches that EPA is suggesting in this guidance. We encourage EPA to retain its existing process of awarding PM2.5 monitoring funds under Section 103. 8 . "For FY 20 1 1 , EPA has requested an additional $15 million in STAG resources to help fund additional monitoring required as a result of revising the NAAQS for lead, NO2, and ozone. EPA intends to use the $15 million for purchasing monitoring equipment using the section 103 authority of the CAA. Beginning in FY 201 1, and through FY 2014, EPA proposes to transition the funding authority for PM2.5 monitoring from section 103 to 105." Comment: The monitoring costs for the new standards will include new shelters as well and construction and start-up costs. The funding for the new networks should be flexible such that any funds dedicated to the new monitoring network(s) should be used initially for acquisition, implementation and start-up with ability to transition Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 4 NPM Response The $15 million targeted for new equipment is intended to cover monitors and the establishment of monitoring sites, to include shelters and associated construction/installation. We will work closely with our partners on the FY1 1 allocation of funds and will use our statutory authority as appropriate. Action Taken in Final Guidance None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 54 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder the funds to 105 matching program as initial start-up needs are met. PM2.5 can transition this way as well as long as EPA recognizes that the 103 funding for PM2.5 should be transitioned in its entirety and not leveraged with the matching funds. 9. "For FY 201 1, EPA proposes to utilize $150,000 prorated from each PAMS recipient, to perform regional and national scale assessments of the network and of the data." Comment: The PAMS program is highly resource-intensive requiring expensive instrumentation and analytical expenditures. Taking this money from the PAMS program for each site seems excessive for an effort that already has a draft document completed. 10. "While EPA anticipates continued support for the characterization of air toxics hotspots at the community level in FY 201 1, EPA intends to further consult with stakeholders on the nature and approach for such support. The Agency will produce supplementary information and guidance for FY 2011." Comment: It is unclear as to the nature Commenter (s) Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Location in Draft Guidance p. 6 p. 19 NPM Response This paragraph was not written clearly. The total amount to be held back to perform the regional and national scale assessment of the network and of the data is $150,000. EPA intends to resume the Community-Scale Air Toxics Monitoring Program in FY1 1 . The request for grant proposals will clearly identify the requirements and expectations for objectives and eligibility, including risk screening, risk characterization, and/or risk assessment. Action Taken in Final Guidance Paragraph rewritten. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 55 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance and extent of this support. Previous years have seen EPA use the community based funding as a source for other unrelated programs. In defining the nature and approach to community air toxics EPA should include clear definition of the expectations from such projects, the efficacy of Risk Assessment as a tool in the evaluation of the results and Stakeholder techniques that will engage and inform the public. 11. OAQPS and OAR should include the EPA regions in the process and logistics of the transition from Section 103 to 105 authority. Region 5 p. 9, last paragraph This is a topic that will be addressed as part of the joint EPA- NACAA follow-up and regions are included as part of this effort. None required. Issue Area: Appendix D - OAR 2010 Priorities 1. The second bullet under Reduce GHG Emissions from Major Sources mentions completion of the tailoring rule and issuance of guidance. EPA does not have the authority to unilaterally change federally-approved SIPs. Even if EPA successfully concludes development of the tailoring rule, the revised GHG thresholds for PSD and Title V purposes will only be effective at the federal level relative to many states. In jurisdictions with federally-approved PSD and Title V programs, the lower permitting thresholds will remain effective in Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 1 EPA received numerous comments on these issues in the tailoring rule proposal. EPA will be addressing these comments in our final tailoring rule, which is expected to be finalized in May. EPA will also continue to work with its regulatory partners through the grant process to ensure a smooth transition to this new work. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-56 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance applicable rules until the agencies complete rulemaking to reflect the new GHG thresholds. We are also concerned about the legal vulnerability of the tailoring rule proposal. If someone successfully challenges the rule, our agencies will find themselves under a deluge of permitting obligations for which no agency can adequately prepare. We suggest that EPA provide an adequate approach and timeframe for implementation of these new requirements to ensure that our agencies have time to prepare for this complex new work. EPA will develop timely guidance and training for permitting authorities. 2. The first bullet mentions providing needed and timely guidance. We concur and encourage delivery of such guidance at the earliest possible moment. We believe that guidance should accompany new rules and programs so that the full scope of proposals can be examined during the comment periods. Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 5 None required. 3. The second bullet references improving processes and reducing administrative burdens. We concur with EPA's desire to improve the process and reduce administrative burdens. Our agencies are currently facilitating the identification of such problems and improvements. We Metro 4, Inc. and Southeastern States Air Resource Managers, Inc. p. 5 EPA does not intend to employ the LEAN analysis of each state program. Rather, EPA participated in a voluntary LEAN analysis with several states. EPA intends to use findings from the analysis to look for efficiencies in SIP processing, which is a federal process. EPA is also looking at a wide variety of other options that may lead to improvements in state and federal processes. We will work with states in incorporating any changes to SIP development and processing. None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H - 57 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder support the LEAN approach to a degree, but it does not solve all of the problems. As we understand it, LEAN looks at existing processes and how they can be streamlined. We believe that many processes need to be reengineered, replaced, or simply eliminated. We suggest that EPA should use its knowledge of what is needed from an air quality standpoint, consider the realistic resource limitations that our agencies are experiencing, place efficiency and effectiveness at the top of the priority list, engage its partner local and state agencies in redesigning the SIP process, and proceed toward implementation as soon as practicable. We do not believe it is appropriate or necessary for EPA to come into our agencies and do a LEAN analysis of individual programs. That should be left to our agencies to do if necessary. EPA may employ LEAN, along with other important considerations, as it evaluates its federal programs, subject to the caution that more than refinement (in fact, redesign) of existing processes may be necessary to resolve existing deficiencies in the federal system. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response Action Taken in Final Guidance Issue Area: Other 1 . This is at least the second year that Region 4 iThe national guidance will include a preliminary allocation for None required. Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-58 of 59 ------- Appendix H - Revision A Comment from regions, state, tribe, or other stakeholder the allocation to the Regions has not been in the draft guidance. This allocation is desperately needed in the April time frame as Regions start meeting with their state/local agencies in April and May to discuss the upcoming grant workplan for the next FY. It is critical that the new funds be allocated based on workload rather than the typical pro rata. This provides an excellent opportunity to allocate the funds consistent with the methodology developed by the internal EPA workgroup. Decisions need to be determined sooner than later to give time for the Regions to work with their state/local agencies to implement any revised allocation as the Region must take the Regional allocation and work with its partners to devise a state allocation which factors in local and regional priorities and issues. Commenter (s) Location in Draft Guidance NPM Response the bulk of state and local air grants being requested by the Agency. Some small areas will still require further discussion with stakeholders. Discussions are still being held regarding the distribution of $15 million for ambient monitoring related to new NAAQS requirements as well as for the distribution of $25 million for increasing permitting capacity for greenhouse gases. These allocations are expected within several months. Action Taken in Final Guidance ++ End ++ Final Guidance May 13, 2010 Appendix H-59 of 59 ------- |